Does CPAP work when it really matters?

A multicenter randomized controlled trial comparing effectiveness of two nasal continuous positive airway pressure devices in very-low-birth-weight infants

OBJECTIVE

Many studies suggest nasal continuous positive airway pressure is an effective and relatively complication-free means of respiratory support in premature infants. However, only limited data exist regarding the practical aspects of nasal continuous positive airway pressure delivery, including the best way to provide the positive airway pressure.

DESIGN

Our aim was to compare the results of treatment using two different nasal continuous positive airway pressure devices: variable flow Infant Flow and constant flow nasal continuous positive airway pressure in two different groups of very-low-birth-weight infants in a multicenter randomized controlled trial. The indication groups were elective to avoid intubation and weaning from mechanical ventilation.

SETTING

Twelve leading tertiary care neonatal centers in Poland.

PATIENTS

Among 276 infants (weighing between 750-1500g, with a gestational age ≤32 wks) enrolled, 51% were randomized to receive Infant Flow and 49% to receive constant flow nasal continuous positive airway pressure.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Treatment success (i.e., no need for intubation/reintubation) occurred in 75% of our patients with a nonstatistically significant advantage seen with Infant Flow. The incidence of severe nasal complications and necrotizing enterocolitis were statistically significantly lower in the infants treated with Infant Flow. In our study, factors associated with elective nasal continuous positive airway pressure failure were birth weight ≤1000 g, gestational age ≤28 wks, clinical risk index for babies score >1, and PaO(2)/FIO(2) ratio of <150. Only birth weight ≤1000 g was associated with weaning failure.

CONCLUSIONS

We found fewer severe nasal complications but no statistically significant advantage in treatment success in infants assigned to Infant Flow nasal continuous positive airway pressure compared with those assigned to constant flow nasal continuous positive airway pressure treatment. Significant risk factors of treatment failure include small size, maturity, and severity of respiratory distress syndrome.

Nasal CPAP and surfactant for treatment of respiratory distress syndrome and prevention of bronchopulmonary dysplasia

The Scandinavian approach is an effective combined treatment for respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) and prevention of bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD). It is composed of many individual parts. Of significant importance is the early treatment with nasal continuous positive airway pressure (nCPAP) and surfactant treatment. The approach may be supplemented with caffeine citrate and non-invasive positive pressure ventilation for apnoea. The low incidence of BPD seen as a consequence of the treatment strategy is mainly due to a reduced need for mechanical ventilation (MV).

CONCLUSION

Early-postnatal treatment with nCPAP and surfactant decreases the severity and mortality of RDS and BPD. This is mainly due to a diminished use of MV in the first days of life.

Does nasal CPAP reduce bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD)?

Early nasal continuous positive airway pressure (nCPAP) or early surfactant therapy with early extubation onto nCPAP rather than continued mechanical ventilation has been adopted by many centres, particularly in Scandinavia, as part of the treatment of newborns with respiratory distress syndrome. It has been suggested that bronchopulmonary dysplasia is less of a problem in centres adopting such a policy. Results from randomized trials suggest prophylactic or early nCPAP may reduce bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD), but further studies are required to determine the relative contributions of an early lung recruitment policy, early surfactant administration and nCPAP in reducing BPD. In addition, the optimum method of generating and delivering CPAP needs to be determined.

CONCLUSION

The efficacy of nCPAP in improving long-term respiratory outcomes needs to be compared with the newer ventilator techniques with the optimum and timing of delivery of surfactant administration.