BACKGROUND: Extubation early in the postoperative period is beneficial to the recovery and rehabilitation of patients. This study compared the postoperative extubation failure rates among infants who received postextubation respiratory support by either bi-level positive airway pressure (BPAP) or nasal CPAP following cardiac surgery. METHODS: This was a single-center randomized controlled trial registered at the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (number ChiCTR2000041453) and was conducted between January 2020 and March 2021. Ventilated infants who underwent cardiac surgery were randomized to either a BPAP or a nasal CPAP group for ventilatory support following extubation. The primary outcome measure was the extubation failure rate within 48 h. RESULTS: The analyses included 186 subjects. Treatment failure necessitating re-intubation was noted in 14 of the 93 infants (15%) in the BPAP group and in 11 of the 93 infants (12%) in the nasal CPAP group (P 5 .52). Moreover, there were no statistically significant differences between the 2 groups regarding the duration of noninvasive ventilation (P 5 .54), total enteral feeding time (P 5 .59), or complications (P 5 .85). We found that both the BPAP group and the nasal CPAP group showed significantly improved oxygenation and relief of respiratory distress after treatment. However, the P aCO 2 level within 24 h was significantly lower in the BPAP group (P 5 .001) than in the CPAP group. Additionally, the P aO 2 /F IO 2 in the BPAP group was significantly higher than in the nasal CPAP group at 6 h, 12 h, and 24 h after treatment (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: The introduction of BPAP for postextubation respiratory support was not inferior to nasal CPAP in infants after cardiac surgery. Moreover, BPAP was shown to be superior to nasal CPAP in improving oxygenation and carbon dioxide clearance.
BackgroundMetagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) has become a valuable diagnostic tool in clinical etiology detection due to its rapidity, accuracy, and high throughput. However, the role of this technology in the diagnosis and treatment of infants with severe pneumonia after congenital heart surgery is still unclear.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study of infants with severe pneumonia after congenital heart surgery. Samples were collected from infants in the hospital’s cardiac intensive care unit between January 2010 and January 2022. The conventional microbiological test (CMT) group consisted of patients who underwent routine microbiological examination, and the infants’ bronchoalveolar lavage fluid was examined. The mNGS group consisted of patients who underwent mNGS and routine microbiological examinations.ResultsThe overall positive rate of mNGS was significantly higher than that of CMT (88.4 vs. 62.5%, P = 0.009). After receipt of the microbiological results, 30/43 (70%) patients in the mNGS group had a change in antibiotic use compared with 14/40 (35%) in the CMT group (P = 0.002). Subsequently, after adjusting the treatment plan according to the microbiological test results, the number of people with improved pulmonary infection in the mNGS group was significantly higher than that in the CMT group (63 vs. 28%, P < 0.05). In addition, the duration of invasive ventilation, length of CICU stay and total hospital length of stay in the mNGS group were significantly lower than those in the CMT group (P < 0.05).ConclusionmNGS is a valuable tool to determine the etiology of infants with severe pneumonia after congenital heart disease surgery. It can significantly improve the sensitivity of pathogen detection, which can help determine appropriate antimicrobial drugs, improve the diagnostic accuracy of the disease, and improve outcomes.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.