Interfaces for non-invasive neonatal resuscitation in the delivery room: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Randomised In Vitro Study Investigating PEEP-Stability During Application of CPAP With Binasal Prongs and Face Masks

AIM

Face masks and binasal prongs are commonly used interfaces for applying continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) in neonatology. We aimed to assess CPAP stability in a randomised controlled in vitro study.

METHODS

In a simulated resuscitation scenario of a 1000-g preterm infant with respiratory distress, 20 operators (10 with/without neonatology experience) aimed to maintain a CPAP of 5 cmH2O as precisely as possible using face masks or binasal prongs in random order. The primary outcome was the minimum-achieved CPAP at the Y-piece (PYmin). Secondary outcomes included time to target CPAP, CPAP stability and the impact of operator experience.

RESULTS

Binasal prongs enabled more consistent maintenance of the target CPAP of 5 cmH2O than face masks (median [IQR]: PYmin: binasal prongs, 3.74 cmH2O [3.54-3.88]) vs. 3.20 cmH2O (2.72-3.73), with no significant deviation from the target CPAP. Target CPAP was achieved significantly faster with face masks (2.89 s [1.67-5.64] vs. 6.49 s [4.76-13.62] [p < 0.05]). No significant differences were observed on the basis of operator experience (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Binasal prongs allow more accurate CPAP maintenance than face masks regardless of the operator's experience, although current clinical studies offer limited evidence on the superiority of nasal interfaces compared with that of face masks.

Skin-to-skin stabilisation and uninterrupted respiratory support for preterm infants after birth: feasibility of a new and simplified rPAP system

BACKGROUND

The rPAP respiratory support system, used for delivery room stabilisation with nasal prongs, has been shown to reduce the need for intubation in extremely preterm infants. A simplified version of the system has been developed. The purpose of this study was to determine the feasibility of providing uninterrupted respiratory support with the simplified rPAP from birth up to 4 hours of life and to assess ease of use for skin-to skin stabilisation.

METHODS

This was a non-randomised feasibility study conducted at Karolinska University Hospital, Sweden. Respiratory support with continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) and positive pressure ventilation if needed was given with the simplified rPAP using heated humidified gases. Respiratory support was provided in the delivery room, during transportation and in the neonatal unit, for a maximum of 4 hours.

RESULTS

32 preterm infants with a mean (SD) gestational age of 33.4 weeks (±1.2) were included. Of 17 infants born vaginally, 13 were stabilised skin-to-skin. The remaining infants were stabilised on a resuscitation table. All infants received CPAP and nine received positive pressure ventilation. 31 infants received continued support during transport and after arrival in the neonatal unit. Minor interruptions in CPAP support occurred in all infants. The study did not reveal problems with usability of the system.

CONCLUSION

It is feasible to stabilise preterm infants with the simplified respiratory support system both skin-to-skin and on a resuscitation table, and to provide continued respiratory support with the same system during transportation and in the neonatal unit.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04244890.

Comparing Intubation Rates in the Delivery Room by Interface

OBJECTIVE

Positive pressure ventilation (PPV) is crucial to the resuscitation of newborns. Although neonates often require PPV at birth, the optimal interface has not been determined. Both binasal prongs and face masks were deemed acceptable by the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation in 2010 and have been utilized at our center since 2016; however, the choice is by provider preference. Previous studies have suggested that binasal prongs may be more effective than face masks at avoiding intubation in the delivery room. The objective of this study is to compare intubation rates of binasal prongs versus face masks for delivery room resuscitation of neonates born < 30 weeks' gestation.

STUDY DESIGN

This retrospective study compares delivery room intubation rates by interface for neonates < 30 weeks' gestation born between August 2016 and April 2021 at our level IV neonatal intensive care unit. Exclusion criteria included diagnosis of congenital diaphragmatic hernia, no PPV required, or no resuscitation attempted. Data collected included interface device, demographics, maternal data, delivery room data, admission data, and discharge outcomes. The three interface groups (binasal prongs, face mask, face mask, and binasal prongs) were compared utilizing chi-square, analysis of variance with post hoc analysis, and logistic regression.

RESULTS

Mean gestational ages and birth weights for the groups were 27.6 weeks and 1,126 g, 25.7 weeks and 839 g, and 27.1 weeks and 1,028 g, respectively. Neonates resuscitated with face masks were 9.9 times more likely to be intubated in the delivery room and 10.8 times more likely to be intubated at 6 hours of life compared with those resuscitated with binasal prongs after logistic regression analysis.

CONCLUSION

The findings in our study support delivery room resuscitation with binasal prongs as a useful method in reducing the need for intubation both in the delivery room and at 6 hours of life. Further prospective studies are warranted.

KEY POINTS

· The International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation recommends multiple interface options for neonatal resuscitation.. · Vermont Oxford Network endorses nasal interface for premature infants.. · Binasal prongs are associated with lower intubation rates..

Noninvasive Ventilation

Systematic Reviews and Randomized clinical trials have shown that the use of noninvasive ventilation (NIV) compared to invasive mechanical ventilation reduces the risk of bronchopulmonary dysplasia and or mortality. Most commonly used NIV modes include nasal continuous positive airway pressure, bi-phasic modes, such as, bi-level positive airway pressure, nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation, high flow nasal cannula, noninvasive neurally adjusted ventilatory assist, and nasal high frequency ventilation are discussed in this review.

Nasal interfaces for neonatal resuscitation

BACKGROUND

The Neonatal Task Force of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) makes practice recommendations for the care of newborn infants in the delivery room (DR). ILCOR recommends that all infants who are gasping, apnoeic, or bradycardic (heart rate < 100 per minute) should be given positive pressure ventilation (PPV) with a manual ventilation device (T-piece, self-inflating bag, or flow-inflating bag) via an interface. The most commonly used interface is a face mask that encircles the infant's nose and mouth. However, gas leak and airway obstruction are common during face mask PPV. Nasal interfaces (single and binasal prongs (long or short), or nasal masks) and laryngeal mask airways (LMAs) may also be used to deliver PPV to newborns in the DR, and may be more effective than face masks.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether newborn infants receiving PPV in the delivery room with a nasal interface compared to a face mask, laryngeal mask airway (LMA), or another type of nasal interface have reduced mortality and morbidity. To assess whether safety and efficacy of the nasal interface differs according to gestational age or ventilation device.

SEARCH METHODS

Searches were conducted in September 2022 in CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Epistemonikos, and two trial registries. We searched conference abstracts and checked the reference lists of included trials and related systematic reviews identified through the search.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCT's that compared the use of nasal interfaces to other interfaces (face masks, LMAs, or one nasal interface to another) to deliver PPV to newborn infants in the DR.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Each review author independently evaluated the search results against the selection criteria, screened retrieved records, extracted data, and appraised the risk of bias. If they were study authors, they did not participate in the selection, risk of bias assessment, or data extraction related to the study. In such instances, the study was independently assessed by other review authors. We contacted trial investigators to obtain additional information. We completed data analysis according to the standards of Cochrane Neonatal, using risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence Intervals (CI) to measure the effect of the different interfaces. We used fixed-effect models and the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included five trials, in which 1406 infants participated. They were conducted in 13 neonatal centres across Europe and Australia. Each of these trials compared a nasal interface to a face mask for the delivery of respiratory support to newborn infants in the DR. Potential sources of bias were a lack of blinding to treatment allocation of the caregivers and investigators in all trials. The evidence suggests that resuscitation with a nasal interface in the DR, compared with a face mask, may have little to no effect on reducing death before discharge (typical risk ratio (RR) 0.72, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.13; 3 studies, 1124 infants; low-certainty evidence). Resuscitation with a nasal interface may reduce the rate of intubation in the DR, but the evidence is very uncertain (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.85; 5 studies, 1406 infants; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain for the rate of intubation within 24 hours of birth (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.09; 3 studies, 749 infants; very low-certainty evidence), endotracheal intubation outside the DR during hospitalisation (RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.42; 1 study, 144 infants; very low-certainty evidence) and cranial ultrasound abnormalities (intraventricular haemorrhage (IVH) grade ≥ 3, or periventricular leukomalacia; RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.61; 3 studies, 749 infants; very low-certainty evidence). Resuscitation with a nasal interface in the DR, compared with a face mask, may have little to no effect on the incidence of air leaks (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.09; 2 studies, 507 infants; low-certainty evidence), or the need for supplemental oxygen at 36 weeks' corrected gestational age (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.8 to 1.40; 2 studies, 507 infants; low-certainty evidence). We identified one ongoing study, which compares a nasal mask to a face mask to deliver PPV to infants in the DR. We did not identify any completed trials that compared nasal interfaces to LMAs or one nasal interface to another.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Nasal interfaces were found to offer comparable efficacy to face masks (low- to very low-certainty evidence), supporting resuscitation guidelines that state that nasal interfaces are a comparable alternative to face masks for providing respiratory support in the DR. Resuscitation with a nasal interface may reduce the rate of intubation in the DR when compared with a face mask. However, the evidence is very uncertain. This uncertainty is attributed to the use of a new ventilation system in the nasal interface group in two of the five trials. As such, it is not possible to differentiate separate, specific effects related to the ventilation device or to the interface in these studies.

Variation in delivery room management of preterm infants across Europe: a survey of the Union of European Neonatal and Perinatal Societies

The aim of the present study, endorsed by the Union of European Neonatal and Perinatal Societies (UENPS) and the Italian Society of Neonatology (SIN), was to analyze the current delivery room (DR) stabilization practices in a large sample of European birth centers that care for preterm infants with gestational age (GA) < 33 weeks. Cross-sectional electronic survey was used in this study. A questionnaire focusing on the current DR practices for infants < 33 weeks' GA, divided in 6 neonatal resuscitation domains, was individually sent to the directors of European neonatal facilities, made available as a web-based link. A comparison was made between hospitals grouped into 5 geographical areas (Eastern Europe (EE), Italy (ITA), Mediterranean countries (MC), Turkey (TUR), and Western Europe (WE)) and between high- and low-volume units across Europe. Two hundred and sixty-two centers from 33 European countries responded to the survey. At the time of the survey, approximately 20,000 very low birth weight (VLBW, < 1500 g) infants were admitted to the participating hospitals, with a median (IQR) of 48 (27-89) infants per center per year. Significant differences between the 5 geographical areas concerned: the volume of neonatal care, ranging from 86 (53-206) admitted VLBW infants per center per year in TUR to 35 (IQR 25-53) in MC; the umbilical cord (UC) management, being the delayed cord clamping performed in < 50% of centers in EE, ITA, and MC, and the cord milking the preferred strategy in TUR; the spotty use of some body temperature control strategies, including thermal mattress mainly employed in WE, and heated humidified gases for ventilation seldom available in MC; and some of the ventilation practices, mainly in regard to the initial FiO2 for < 28 weeks' GA infants, pressures selected for ventilation, and the preferred interface to start ventilation. Specifically, 62.5% of TUR centers indicated the short binasal prongs as the preferred interface, as opposed to the face mask which is widely adopted as first choice in > 80% of the rest of the responding units; the DR surfactant administration, which ranges from 44.4% of the birth centers in MC to 87.5% in WE; and, finally, the ethical issues around the minimal GA limit to provide full resuscitation, ranging from 22 to 25 weeks across Europe. A comparison between high- and low-volume units showed significant differences in the domains of UC management and ventilation practices.    Conclusion: Current DR practice and ethical choices show similarities and divergences across Europe. Some areas of assistance, like UC management and DR ventilation strategies, would benefit of standardization. Clinicians and stakeholders should consider this information when allocating resources and planning European perinatal programs. What is Known: • Delivery room (DR) support of preterm infants has a direct influence on both immediate survival and long-term morbidity. • Resuscitation practices for preterm infants often deviate from the internationally defined algorithms. What is New: • Current DR practice and ethical choices show similarities and divergences across Europe. Some areas of assistance, like UC management and DR ventilation strategies, would benefit of standardization. • Clinicians and stakeholders should consider this information when allocating resources and planning European perinatal programs.

Impact of early respiratory care for extremely preterm infants

Despite advances in neonatal intensive care, more than half of surviving infants born extremely preterm (EP; < 28 weeks' gestation) develop bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD). Prevention of BPD is critical because of its associated mortality and morbidity, including adverse neurodevelopmental outcomes and respiratory health in later childhood and beyond. The respiratory care of EP infants begins before birth, then continues in the delivery room and throughout the primary hospitalization. This chapter will review the evidence for interventions after birth that might improve outcomes for infants born EP, including the timing of umbilical cord clamping, strategies to avoid or minimize exposure to mechanical ventilation, modes of mechanical ventilation and non-invasive respiratory support, oxygen saturation targets, postnatal corticosteroids and other adjunct therapies.

Comparison of Respiratory Support After Delivery in Infants Born Before 28 Weeks' Gestational Age: The CORSAD Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Establishing stable breathing is a key event for preterm infants after birth. Delivery of pressure-stable continuous positive airway pressure and avoiding face mask use could be of importance in the delivery room.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether using a new respiratory support system with low imposed work of breathing and short binasal prongs decreases delivery room intubations or death compared with a standard T-piece system with a face mask.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

In this unblinded randomized clinical trial, mothers threatening preterm delivery before week 28 of gestation were screened. A total of 365 mothers were enrolled, and 250 infants were randomized before birth and 246 liveborn infants were treated. The trial was conducted in 7 neonatal intensive care units in 5 European countries from March 2016 to May 2020. The follow-up period was 72 hours after intervention.

INTERVENTIONS

Infants were randomized to either the new respiratory support system with short binasal prongs (n = 124 infants) or the standard T-piece system with face mask (n = 122 infants). The intervention was providing continuous positive airway pressure for 10 to 30 minutes and positive pressure ventilation, if needed, with the randomized system.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was delivery room intubation or death within 30 minutes of birth. Secondary outcomes included respiratory and safety variables.

RESULTS

Of 246 liveborn infants treated, the mean (SD) gestational age was 25.9 (1.3) weeks, and 127 (51.6%) were female. A total of 41 infants (33.1%) receiving the new respiratory support system were intubated or died in the delivery room compared with 55 infants (45.1%) receiving standard care. The adjusted odds ratio was statistically significant after adjusting for stratification variables (adjusted odds ratio, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.30-0.94; P = .03). No significant differences were seen in secondary outcomes or safety variables.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this study, using the new respiratory support system reduced delivery room intubation in extremely preterm infants. Stabilizing preterm infants with a system that has low imposed work of breathing and binasal prongs as interface is safe and feasible.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02563717.

Resuscitation highlights in 2020

BACKGROUND

This review is the latest in a series of regular annual reviews undertaken by the editors and aims to highlight some of the key papers published in Resuscitation during 2020. The number of papers submitted to the Journal in 2020 increased by 25% on the previous year.MethodsHand-searching by the editors of all papers published in Resuscitation during 2020. Papers were selected based on then general interest and novelty and were categorised into general themes.ResultsA total of 103 papers were selected for brief mention in this review.ConclusionsResuscitation science continues to evolve rapidly and incorporate all links in the chain of survival.