Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2021
Neurally adjusted ventilatory assist in neonates with congenital diaphragmatic hernia.
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.
Kurland Yonatan, Gurung Kamal, Pallotto Eugenia K, Manimtim Winston, Feldman Keith, Staggs Vincent S, Truog William
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To measure short-term outcomes of neonates with congenital diaphragmatic hernia (CDH) while on Neurally Adjusted Ventilator Assist (NAVA), and to measure the impact of a congenitally abnormal diaphragm on NAVA ventilator indices.
STUDY DESIGN: First, we conducted a retrospective-cohort analysis of 16 neonates with CDH placed on NAVA over a treatment period of 72 h. Second, we performed a case-control study comparing NAVA level and Edi between neonates with CDH and those without CDH.
RESULTS: Compared to pre-NAVA, there were clinically meaningful improvements in PIP (p < 0.003), Respiratory Severity Score (p < 0.001), MAP (p < 0.001), morphine (p = 0.004), and midazolam use (p = 0.037). Compared to a 1:2 matched group without CDH, there was no meaningful difference in NAVA level (p = 0.286), Edi-Peak (p = 0.315), or Edi-Min (p = 0.266).
CONCLUSIONS: The potential benefits of NAVA extend to neonates with CDH. There is minimal compensatory change in Edis, and higher/lower ventilator settings compared to neonates without CDH.
STUDY DESIGN: First, we conducted a retrospective-cohort analysis of 16 neonates with CDH placed on NAVA over a treatment period of 72 h. Second, we performed a case-control study comparing NAVA level and Edi between neonates with CDH and those without CDH.
RESULTS: Compared to pre-NAVA, there were clinically meaningful improvements in PIP (p < 0.003), Respiratory Severity Score (p < 0.001), MAP (p < 0.001), morphine (p = 0.004), and midazolam use (p = 0.037). Compared to a 1:2 matched group without CDH, there was no meaningful difference in NAVA level (p = 0.286), Edi-Peak (p = 0.315), or Edi-Min (p = 0.266).
CONCLUSIONS: The potential benefits of NAVA extend to neonates with CDH. There is minimal compensatory change in Edis, and higher/lower ventilator settings compared to neonates without CDH.