Noninvasive High-Frequency Oscillatory Ventilation: A Retrospective Chart Review

Ali, Yaser A. H.; Seshia, Mary; Ali, Ebtihal; Alvaro, Ruben

doi:10.1055/s-0040-1718738

Cited by 10 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This area is complex, and many strategies are possible; therefore, a multigroup study design was suitable to allow a quicker and more effective investigation . We believe the findings expand the current knowledge, particularly on NHFOV, which was previously investigated only in retrospective studies and small trials; these past studies suggested the possible benefits of NHFOV, as also reported in a recent meta-analysis …”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 72%

Noninvasive High-Frequency Oscillatory Ventilation vs Nasal Continuous Positive Airway Pressure vs Nasal Intermittent Positive Pressure Ventilation as Postextubation Support for Preterm Neonates in China

Zhu

Feng

et al. 2022

JAMA Pediatr

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

for the Nasal Oscillation Post-Extubation (NASONE) Study Group IMPORTANCE Several respiratory support techniques are available to minimize the use of invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) in preterm neonates. It is unknown whether noninvasive high-frequency oscillatory ventilation (NHFOV) is more efficacious than nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP) or nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) in preterm neonates after their first extubation.OBJECTIVE To test the hypothesis that NHFOV is more efficacious than NCPAP or NIPPV in reducing IMV after extubation and until neonatal intensive care unit discharge among preterm neonates. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTSThis multicenter, pathophysiology-based, assessor-blinded, 3-group, randomized clinical trial was conducted in 69 tertiary referral neonatal intensive care units in China, recruiting participants from December 1, 2017, to May 31, 2021. Preterm neonates who were between the gestational age of 25 weeks plus 0 days and 32 weeks plus 6 days and were ready to be extubated were randomized to receive NCPAP, NIPPV or NHFOV. Data were analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis. INTERVENTIONSThe NCPAP, NIPPV, or NHFOV treatment was initiated after the first extubation and lasted until discharge.MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Primary outcomes were total duration of IMV, need for reintubation, and ventilator-free days. These outcomes were chosen to describe the effect of noninvasive ventilation strategy on the general need for IMV.RESULTS A total of 1440 neonates (mean [SD] age at birth, 29.4 [1.8] weeks; 860 boys [59.7%]) were included in the trial. Duration of IMV was longer in NIPPV (mean difference, 1.2; 95% CI, 0.01-2.3 days; P = .04) and NCPAP (mean difference, 1.5 days; 95% CI, 0.3-2.7 days; P = .01) compared with NHFOV. Neonates who were treated with NCPAP needed reintubations more often than those who were treated with NIPPV (risk difference: 8.1%; 95% CI, 2.9%-13.3%; P = .003) and NHFOV (risk difference, 12.5%; 95% CI, 7.5%-17.4%; P < .001). There were fewer ventilator-free days in neonates treated with NCPAP than in those treated with NIPPV (median [25th-75th percentile] difference, −3 [−6 to −1] days; P = .01). There were no differences between secondary efficacy or safety outcomes, except for the use of postnatal corticosteroids (lower in NHFOV than in NCPAP group; risk difference, 7.3%; 95% CI, 2.6%-12%; P = .002), weekly weight gain (higher in NHFOV than in NCPAP group; mean difference, −0.9 g/d; 95% CI, −1.8 to 0 g/d; P = .04), and duration of study intervention (shorter in NHFOV than in NIPPV group; median [25th-75th percentile] difference, −1 [−3 to 0] days; P = .01).CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Results of this trial indicated that NHFOV, if used after extubation and until discharge, slightly reduced the duration of IMV in preterm neonates, and both NHFOV and NIPPV resulted in a lower risk of reintubation than NCPAP. All 3 respiratory support techniques were equally safe for this patient population.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 72%

Noninvasive High-Frequency Oscillatory Ventilation vs Nasal Continuous Positive Airway Pressure vs Nasal Intermittent Positive Pressure Ventilation as Postextubation Support for Preterm Neonates in China

Zhu

Feng

et al. 2022

JAMA Pediatr

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Studies have shown that nHFOV can reduce the need for IMV compared to other NIV techniques (12)(13)(14). In this study, we found that compared to BiPAP, nHFOV as initial respiratory support reduced the need for IMV within the first 72 h of life.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 53%

Non-invasive High-Frequency Oscillatory Ventilation as Initial Respiratory Support for Preterm Infants With Respiratory Distress Syndrome

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: The aim of this study was to investigate the safety and feasibility of nHFOV as initial respiratory support in preterm infants with RDS.Methods: This study retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 244 premature infants with RDS who were treated in our hospital from January 2016 to January 2019 and divided into the nHFOV group (n = 115) and the BiPAP group (n = 129) based on the initial respiratory support method.Results: Respiratory outcomes showed that the rate of NIV failure during the first 72 hours of life in the nHFOV group was significantly lower than that in the BiPAP group. The time of NIV in the nHFOV group was significantly shorter than that in the BiPAP group. The time of supplemental oxygen in the nHFOV group was significantly shorter than that in the BiPAP group. The incidence of air leakage syndrome in the nHFOV group was significantly lower than that in the BiPAP group, and the length of hospital stay of the nHFOV group was also significantly shorter than that in the BiPAP group. Although the rate of infants diagnosed with BPD was similar between the two groups, the rate of severe BPD in the nHFOV group was significantly lower than that in the BiPAP group.Conclusion: This study showed that nHFOV as initial respiratory support for preterm infants with RDS was feasible and safe compared to BiPAP. Furthermore, nHFOV can reduce the need for IMV and reduce the incidence of severe BPD and air leak syndrome.

show abstract

“…Multiple observational studies have reported the benefits of NHFOV for neonatal respiratory support. It has been reported that NHFOV use results in decreased treatment failure or need for re-intubation, reduces apnea episodes and improves ventilation without any significant adverse effects ( 133 – 135 ). A recent meta-analysis of 10 RCTs (681 neonates) revealed that NHFOV use is associated with significantly lower need for intubation and IMV [Odds Risk (95% CI): 0.29 (0.2–0.4)] when compared to BiPAP and CPAP ( 132 ).…”

Section: Nasal High-frequency Ventilation (Nhfv)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Non-invasive ventilation in neonates: a review of current literature

Ramaswamy,

Devi,

Kumar

2023

Front. Pediatr.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Moving from an era of invasive ventilation to that of non-invasive respiratory support, various modalities have emerged resulting in improved neonatal outcomes. Respiratory distress is the commonest problem seen both in preterm and term neonates, and the use of appropriate respiratory support could be lifesaving. This article reviews the currently available non-invasive ventilation (NIV) strategies in neonates including nasal continuous positive airway pressure, nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV), bi-level CPAP, heated humidified high flow nasal cannula, nasal high-frequency ventilation (NHFV) and non-invasive neutrally adjusted ventilatory assist (NIV-NAVA). Though multiple systematic reviews and meta-analyses have indicated the superiority of synchronized NIPPV over the other forms of non-invasive respiratory support in neonates, there is no single NIV modality that universally suits all. Hence, the choice of NIV for a neonate should be individualized based on its efficacy, the disease pathology, resource settings, the clinician's familiarity and parental values. Future studies should evaluate emerging modalities such as NIV-NAVA and NHFV in the respiratory management of neonates as the evidence pertaining to these is insufficient.

show abstract

Noninvasive High-Frequency Oscillatory Ventilation: A Retrospective Chart Review

Cited by 10 publications

References 21 publications

Noninvasive High-Frequency Oscillatory Ventilation vs Nasal Continuous Positive Airway Pressure vs Nasal Intermittent Positive Pressure Ventilation as Postextubation Support for Preterm Neonates in China

Noninvasive High-Frequency Oscillatory Ventilation vs Nasal Continuous Positive Airway Pressure vs Nasal Intermittent Positive Pressure Ventilation as Postextubation Support for Preterm Neonates in China

Non-invasive High-Frequency Oscillatory Ventilation as Initial Respiratory Support for Preterm Infants With Respiratory Distress Syndrome

Non-invasive ventilation in neonates: a review of current literature

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About