Neonatal Noninvasive Ventilation Techniques: Do We Really Need to Intubate?

Comparison of HFNC, bubble CPAP and SiPAP on aerosol delivery in neonates: An in‐vitro study

“…The main difference between the SiPAP and other IF-CPAP and NIV devices is that SiPAP permits the infant to continuously breathe at two different CPAP levels. The possible benefits of using these two pressures are reduced breathing asynchrony and WOB during both inspiration and expiration (Liptsen et al, 2005; improved alveolar recruitment and gas exchange, maintaining FRC at the end of expiration, providing airflow stimulation to avert apnea, and decreasing the need for invasive ventilation (DiBlasi, 2009(DiBlasi, , 2011. No studies investigating delivery efficiency of SiPAP in the treatment of infants with pulmonary diseases were found that could be compared to the results of this study.…”

“…Previous research has found that B-NCPAP may decrease the need for intubation and lower the incidence of CLD (Courtney et al, 2011;DiBlasi, 2011;Kahn et al, 2008). Moreover, B-NCPAP has become a favored device due to the perception the oscillation delivered by continuous bubbling of the device may be beneficial and may contribute to improving the gas exchange and reducing the WOB (Kahn et al, 2008;Liptsen et al, 2005).…”

Neonatal and Pediatric Respiratory Care: What Does the Future Hold?

“…23 It is interesting to note that neonatal NIV is not a new concept. In the early 1970s, clinicians reported unsuccessful NIV with an oronasal mask attached to an intermittent-positive-pressure-breathing machine or pediatric volume-cycled ventilator.…”

High-Flow Nasal Cannula for Neonatal Respiratory Distress: Is It Enough?

“…18,28,29 It is essential to remember that not all infants can be successfully supported with CPAP alone, as demonstrated by the high rates of intubation in the CPAP-only arms of the SUPPORT and the CURPAP trials, and that the optimal strategy of respiratory support in neonates remains elusive. 30 Randomized clinical trials are needed to identify which patients are most likely to benefit from noninvasive ventilation and the optimal devices to deliver that support. 24 In the meantime, carefully designed experimental studies such as the one by Volsko and colleagues are important additions to the body of available data addressing the effectiveness of HFNC in delivering continuous distending pressure.…”