SNIPPV vs. NIPPV: DOES SYNCHRONIZATION MATTER?

BACKGROUND: Use of nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) has shown promise with better clinical outcomes in premature neonates. It is not known if synchronization makes a significant clinical impact when using this technique. OBJECTIVE: To compare clinical outcomes of premature infants on synchronized NIPPV (SNIPPV) vs. NIPPV in the NICU. DESIGN/METHODS: Retrospective data were obtained (1/04 to 12/09) of infants who received NIPPV anytime in the NICU. SNIPPV (Infant Star with StarSync) was utilized from 2004–06, while NIPPV (Bear Cub) was used from 2007–09. BPD was defined using the NIH consensus definition. Unadjusted associations between potential risk factors and BPD/death were assessed using the chi-square or Wilcoxon Rank Sum test. Adjusted analyses were performed using generalized linear mixed models, taking into account correlation among infants of multiple gestation. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the mean gestational age and birth weight in the 2 groups: SNIPPV (n=172; 27.0w; 1016g), NIPPV (n=238; 27.7w; 1117g). There were no significant differences in maternal demographics, use of antenatal steroids, gender, multiple births, SGA, or Apgar scores in the 2 groups. More infants in the NIPPV group were given resuscitation in the delivery room (SNIPPV vs. NIPPV: 44.2% vs. 63%, p<0.001). Surfactant use (84.4% vs. 70.2%; p<0.001) was significantly higher in the SNIPPV group. There were no differences in the rate of PDA, IVH, PVL, ROP, and NEC in the 2 groups. After adjusting for the significant variables, use of NIPPV vs. SNIPPV (OR 0.74; 95%CI: 0.42, 1.30) was not associated with BPD/death. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that use of SNIPPV vs. NIPPV is not significantly associated with a differential impact on clinical outcomes.