Cargando…

Individualized dynamic PEEP (dynPEEP) vs. positive pressure ventilation in delivery room management: A retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE: Although nasal continuous positive airway pressure (nCPAP) is recommended in delivery room (DR) management for preterm infants, the effect of delivering nCPAP at 6–8 cmH(2)O is not satisfactory. Therefore, we conducted this retrospective cohort study to compare the effects of individualiz...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Song, Sijie, Zhu, Yefang, Li, Jie, Wang, Qi, Gong, Hua, Zhong, Xiaoyun, Wu, Yan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9874145/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36714644
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fped.2022.1007632
_version_ 1784877740902580224
author Song, Sijie
Zhu, Yefang
Li, Jie
Wang, Qi
Gong, Hua
Zhong, Xiaoyun
Wu, Yan
author_facet Song, Sijie
Zhu, Yefang
Li, Jie
Wang, Qi
Gong, Hua
Zhong, Xiaoyun
Wu, Yan
author_sort Song, Sijie
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: Although nasal continuous positive airway pressure (nCPAP) is recommended in delivery room (DR) management for preterm infants, the effect of delivering nCPAP at 6–8 cmH(2)O is not satisfactory. Therefore, we conducted this retrospective cohort study to compare the effects of individualized dynamic positive end-expiratory pressure (dynPEEP) vs. positive pressure ventilation (PPV) in the DR on clinical outcomes. METHODS: Preterm infants with a gestational age (GA) less than 30 weeks who received PPV (peak inspiratory pressure, PIP/PEEP 15–25/6–8 cmH(2)O) from August 2018 to July 2020 were included as Cohort 1 (PPV group, n = 55), and those who received dynPEEP (nCPAP 8–15 cmH(2)O) from June 2020 to April 2022 were included as Cohort 2 (dynPEEP group, n = 62). Primary outcomes included the DR intubation rate and the bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD) rate. The secondary outcomes included DR stabilization, transfer, admission, respiratory function, and other outcomes. RESULTS: The percentage of singleton infants was higher in the PPV group (63.6%) than in the dynPEEP group (22.6%, p = 0.000). The DR intubation and chest compression rates were higher in the PPV group (80.0% and 18.2%, respectively) than in the dynPEEP group (45.2%, p = 0.000; 3.0%, p = 0.008, respectively). The percentage of patients with 5-min Apgar scores < 5 was higher in the PPV group (9.1%) than in the dynPEEP group (0%, p = 0.016). The partial pressure of carbon dioxide was lower in the PPV group (49.77 ± 11.28) than in the dynPEEP group (56.44 ± 13.17, p = 0.004), and lactate levels were higher in the PPV group (3.60 (2.10, 5.90)) than in the dynPEEP group (2.25 (1.38, 3.33), p = 0.002). No significant differences in the BPD rate or other secondary outcomes were noted. CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective cohort study, the dynPEEP strategy reduced the need for DR intubation compared with PPV. The dynPEEP strategy is feasible and potentially represents an alternative respiratory strategy to PPV. Nevertheless, a randomized control trial is needed to evaluate the dynPEEP strategy.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9874145
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-98741452023-01-26 Individualized dynamic PEEP (dynPEEP) vs. positive pressure ventilation in delivery room management: A retrospective cohort study Song, Sijie Zhu, Yefang Li, Jie Wang, Qi Gong, Hua Zhong, Xiaoyun Wu, Yan Front Pediatr Pediatrics OBJECTIVE: Although nasal continuous positive airway pressure (nCPAP) is recommended in delivery room (DR) management for preterm infants, the effect of delivering nCPAP at 6–8 cmH(2)O is not satisfactory. Therefore, we conducted this retrospective cohort study to compare the effects of individualized dynamic positive end-expiratory pressure (dynPEEP) vs. positive pressure ventilation (PPV) in the DR on clinical outcomes. METHODS: Preterm infants with a gestational age (GA) less than 30 weeks who received PPV (peak inspiratory pressure, PIP/PEEP 15–25/6–8 cmH(2)O) from August 2018 to July 2020 were included as Cohort 1 (PPV group, n = 55), and those who received dynPEEP (nCPAP 8–15 cmH(2)O) from June 2020 to April 2022 were included as Cohort 2 (dynPEEP group, n = 62). Primary outcomes included the DR intubation rate and the bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD) rate. The secondary outcomes included DR stabilization, transfer, admission, respiratory function, and other outcomes. RESULTS: The percentage of singleton infants was higher in the PPV group (63.6%) than in the dynPEEP group (22.6%, p = 0.000). The DR intubation and chest compression rates were higher in the PPV group (80.0% and 18.2%, respectively) than in the dynPEEP group (45.2%, p = 0.000; 3.0%, p = 0.008, respectively). The percentage of patients with 5-min Apgar scores < 5 was higher in the PPV group (9.1%) than in the dynPEEP group (0%, p = 0.016). The partial pressure of carbon dioxide was lower in the PPV group (49.77 ± 11.28) than in the dynPEEP group (56.44 ± 13.17, p = 0.004), and lactate levels were higher in the PPV group (3.60 (2.10, 5.90)) than in the dynPEEP group (2.25 (1.38, 3.33), p = 0.002). No significant differences in the BPD rate or other secondary outcomes were noted. CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective cohort study, the dynPEEP strategy reduced the need for DR intubation compared with PPV. The dynPEEP strategy is feasible and potentially represents an alternative respiratory strategy to PPV. Nevertheless, a randomized control trial is needed to evaluate the dynPEEP strategy. Frontiers Media S.A. 2023-01-11 /pmc/articles/PMC9874145/ /pubmed/36714644 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fped.2022.1007632 Text en © 2023 Song, Zhu, Li, Wang, Gong, Zhong and Wu. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Pediatrics
Song, Sijie
Zhu, Yefang
Li, Jie
Wang, Qi
Gong, Hua
Zhong, Xiaoyun
Wu, Yan
Individualized dynamic PEEP (dynPEEP) vs. positive pressure ventilation in delivery room management: A retrospective cohort study
title Individualized dynamic PEEP (dynPEEP) vs. positive pressure ventilation in delivery room management: A retrospective cohort study
title_full Individualized dynamic PEEP (dynPEEP) vs. positive pressure ventilation in delivery room management: A retrospective cohort study
title_fullStr Individualized dynamic PEEP (dynPEEP) vs. positive pressure ventilation in delivery room management: A retrospective cohort study
title_full_unstemmed Individualized dynamic PEEP (dynPEEP) vs. positive pressure ventilation in delivery room management: A retrospective cohort study
title_short Individualized dynamic PEEP (dynPEEP) vs. positive pressure ventilation in delivery room management: A retrospective cohort study
title_sort individualized dynamic peep (dynpeep) vs. positive pressure ventilation in delivery room management: a retrospective cohort study
topic Pediatrics
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9874145/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36714644
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fped.2022.1007632
work_keys_str_mv AT songsijie individualizeddynamicpeepdynpeepvspositivepressureventilationindeliveryroommanagementaretrospectivecohortstudy
AT zhuyefang individualizeddynamicpeepdynpeepvspositivepressureventilationindeliveryroommanagementaretrospectivecohortstudy
AT lijie individualizeddynamicpeepdynpeepvspositivepressureventilationindeliveryroommanagementaretrospectivecohortstudy
AT wangqi individualizeddynamicpeepdynpeepvspositivepressureventilationindeliveryroommanagementaretrospectivecohortstudy
AT gonghua individualizeddynamicpeepdynpeepvspositivepressureventilationindeliveryroommanagementaretrospectivecohortstudy
AT zhongxiaoyun individualizeddynamicpeepdynpeepvspositivepressureventilationindeliveryroommanagementaretrospectivecohortstudy
AT wuyan individualizeddynamicpeepdynpeepvspositivepressureventilationindeliveryroommanagementaretrospectivecohortstudy