Cargando…
Pro/con clinical debate: High-frequency oscillatory ventilation is better than conventional ventilation for premature infants
Arguably one of the most important advances in critical care medicine in recent years has been the understanding that mechanical ventilators can impart harm and that lung-protective ventilation strategies can save lives. High-frequency oscillatory ventilation appears ideally suited for lung protecti...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2003
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC374363/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14624681 |
_version_ | 1782121277335535616 |
---|---|
author | Courtney, Sherry E Durand, David J Asselin, Jeanette M Eichenwald, Eric C Stark, Ann R |
author_facet | Courtney, Sherry E Durand, David J Asselin, Jeanette M Eichenwald, Eric C Stark, Ann R |
author_sort | Courtney, Sherry E |
collection | PubMed |
description | Arguably one of the most important advances in critical care medicine in recent years has been the understanding that mechanical ventilators can impart harm and that lung-protective ventilation strategies can save lives. High-frequency oscillatory ventilation appears ideally suited for lung protection at first glance. Two camps of opinion exist, however, even in neonates where this modality has been most extensively studied. In the present debate, the prevailing arguments from each of those camps are made available for the reader to decide. |
format | Text |
id | pubmed-374363 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2003 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-3743632004-03-25 Pro/con clinical debate: High-frequency oscillatory ventilation is better than conventional ventilation for premature infants Courtney, Sherry E Durand, David J Asselin, Jeanette M Eichenwald, Eric C Stark, Ann R Crit Care Review Arguably one of the most important advances in critical care medicine in recent years has been the understanding that mechanical ventilators can impart harm and that lung-protective ventilation strategies can save lives. High-frequency oscillatory ventilation appears ideally suited for lung protection at first glance. Two camps of opinion exist, however, even in neonates where this modality has been most extensively studied. In the present debate, the prevailing arguments from each of those camps are made available for the reader to decide. BioMed Central 2003 2003-04-14 /pmc/articles/PMC374363/ /pubmed/14624681 Text en Copyright © 2003 BioMed Central Ltd |
spellingShingle | Review Courtney, Sherry E Durand, David J Asselin, Jeanette M Eichenwald, Eric C Stark, Ann R Pro/con clinical debate: High-frequency oscillatory ventilation is better than conventional ventilation for premature infants |
title | Pro/con clinical debate: High-frequency oscillatory ventilation is better than conventional ventilation for premature infants |
title_full | Pro/con clinical debate: High-frequency oscillatory ventilation is better than conventional ventilation for premature infants |
title_fullStr | Pro/con clinical debate: High-frequency oscillatory ventilation is better than conventional ventilation for premature infants |
title_full_unstemmed | Pro/con clinical debate: High-frequency oscillatory ventilation is better than conventional ventilation for premature infants |
title_short | Pro/con clinical debate: High-frequency oscillatory ventilation is better than conventional ventilation for premature infants |
title_sort | pro/con clinical debate: high-frequency oscillatory ventilation is better than conventional ventilation for premature infants |
topic | Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC374363/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14624681 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT courtneysherrye proconclinicaldebatehighfrequencyoscillatoryventilationisbetterthanconventionalventilationforprematureinfants AT duranddavidj proconclinicaldebatehighfrequencyoscillatoryventilationisbetterthanconventionalventilationforprematureinfants AT asselinjeanettem proconclinicaldebatehighfrequencyoscillatoryventilationisbetterthanconventionalventilationforprematureinfants AT eichenwaldericc proconclinicaldebatehighfrequencyoscillatoryventilationisbetterthanconventionalventilationforprematureinfants AT starkannr proconclinicaldebatehighfrequencyoscillatoryventilationisbetterthanconventionalventilationforprematureinfants |