American journal of perinatology · 2021
High-Frequency Positive Pressure Ventilation as Primary Rescue Strategy for Patients with Congenital Diaphragmatic Hernia: A Comparison to High-Frequency Oscillatory Ventilation.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Gerall Claire, Wallman-Stokes Aaron, Stewart Latoya, Price Jessica, Kabagambe Sandra, Fan Weijia, Hernan Rebecca, Wung Jen, Sahni Rakesh, Penn Anna, Duron Vincent
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this article was to evaluate high-frequency positive pressure ventilation (HFPPV) compared with high-frequency oscillatory ventilation (HFOV) as a rescue ventilation strategy for patients with congenital diaphragmatic hernia (CDH). HFPPV is a pressure-controlled conventional ventilation method utilizing high respiratory rate and low positive end-expiratory pressure.
STUDY DESIGN: Seventy-seven patients diagnosed with CDH from January 2005 to September 2019 who were treated with stepwise progression from HFPPV to HFOV versus only HFOV were included. Fisher's exact test and the Kruskal-Wallis test were used to compare outcomes.
RESULTS: Patients treated with HFPPV + HFOV had higher survival to discharge (80 vs. 50%, p = 0.007) and to surgical intervention (95.6 vs. 68.8%, p = 0.003), with average age at repair 2 days earlier (p = 0.004). Need for extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (p = 0.490), inhaled nitric oxide (p = 0.585), supplemental oxygen (p = 0.341), and pulmonary hypertension medications (p = 0.381) were similar.
CONCLUSION: In CDH patients who fail respiratory support with conventional ventilation, HFPPV may be used as an intermediary mode of rescue ventilation prior to HFOV without adverse effects.
KEY POINTS: · HFPPV may be used as an intermediary mode of rescue ventilation prior to HFOV without adverse effect.. · HFPPV is more widely available and can mitigate the limitations faced when using HFOV.. · HFPPV allows for intra- or interhospital transfer of neonates with CDH..
STUDY DESIGN: Seventy-seven patients diagnosed with CDH from January 2005 to September 2019 who were treated with stepwise progression from HFPPV to HFOV versus only HFOV were included. Fisher's exact test and the Kruskal-Wallis test were used to compare outcomes.
RESULTS: Patients treated with HFPPV + HFOV had higher survival to discharge (80 vs. 50%, p = 0.007) and to surgical intervention (95.6 vs. 68.8%, p = 0.003), with average age at repair 2 days earlier (p = 0.004). Need for extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (p = 0.490), inhaled nitric oxide (p = 0.585), supplemental oxygen (p = 0.341), and pulmonary hypertension medications (p = 0.381) were similar.
CONCLUSION: In CDH patients who fail respiratory support with conventional ventilation, HFPPV may be used as an intermediary mode of rescue ventilation prior to HFOV without adverse effects.
KEY POINTS: · HFPPV may be used as an intermediary mode of rescue ventilation prior to HFOV without adverse effect.. · HFPPV is more widely available and can mitigate the limitations faced when using HFOV.. · HFPPV allows for intra- or interhospital transfer of neonates with CDH..