切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版) ›› 2014, Vol. 10 ›› Issue (04) : 511 -515. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1673-5250.2014.04.024

所属专题: 文献

论著

经鼻同步间歇正压通气与经鼻持续正压通气治疗早产儿合并新生儿呼吸窘迫综合征的临床疗效研究
廖积仁1,*,*(), 刘玉婵1, 谭菁1, 陈烨1, 王平1, 李科翔1, 唐伟淘1   
  1. 1. 412008 湖南省株洲市妇幼保健院新生儿科
  • 收稿日期:2014-01-15 修回日期:2014-05-28 出版日期:2014-08-01
  • 通信作者: 廖积仁

Comparison of Nasal Synchronized Intermittent Positive Pressure Ventilation and Nasal Continuous Positive Airway Pressure in the Treatment of Neonatal Respiratory Distress Syndrome in Premature Infants

Jiren Liao1(), Yuchan Liu1, Jing Tan1, Yie Chen1, Ping Wang1, Kexiang Li1, Weitao Tang1   

  1. 1. Department of Neonatology, Zhuzhou Maternal and Child Health Care Hospital of Hunan Province, Zhuzhou 412008, Hunan Province, China
  • Received:2014-01-15 Revised:2014-05-28 Published:2014-08-01
  • Corresponding author: Jiren Liao
  • About author:
    (Corresponding author: Liao Jiren, Email: )
引用本文:

廖积仁, 刘玉婵, 谭菁, 陈烨, 王平, 李科翔, 唐伟淘. 经鼻同步间歇正压通气与经鼻持续正压通气治疗早产儿合并新生儿呼吸窘迫综合征的临床疗效研究[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2014, 10(04): 511-515.

Jiren Liao, Yuchan Liu, Jing Tan, Yie Chen, Ping Wang, Kexiang Li, Weitao Tang. Comparison of Nasal Synchronized Intermittent Positive Pressure Ventilation and Nasal Continuous Positive Airway Pressure in the Treatment of Neonatal Respiratory Distress Syndrome in Premature Infants[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2014, 10(04): 511-515.

目的

探讨早产儿合并新生儿呼吸窘迫综合征(NRDS)在"气管插管-应用肺表面活性物质-拔管"(INSURE)后使用经鼻同步间歇正压通气(NSIPPV)与经鼻持续正压通气(NCPAP)治疗的疗效及安全性。

方法

选择2012年1月至2013年7月于湖南省株洲市妇幼保健院新生儿科住院治疗的51例早产合并NRDS,并需进行呼吸支持患儿为研究对象。将其按照呼吸支持治疗方式,分为NSIPPV组(n= 25)与NCPAP组(n = 26)。分析比较两组患儿于呼吸支持治疗前及呼吸支持治疗后6 h、24 h、48 h等时间点的动脉氧分压()、动脉二氧化碳分压()、呼吸指数(RI)、并发症及转归情况等(本研究遵循的程序符合湖南省株洲市妇幼保健院人体试验委员会制定的伦理学标准,得到该委员会批准,分组征得受试对象监护人知情同意,并与监护人签署临床研究知情同意书)。两组患儿性别、胎龄、出生体质量等一般临床资料比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。

结果

本研究结果为:①两组患儿在治疗前,及RI比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05);②水平比较:两组在治疗后6 h及24 h比较时,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05),但治疗后48 h时,NSIPPV组显著高于NCPAP组,且差异有统计学意义(P<0.01);两组均在治疗后6 h、24 h及48 h时较同组治疗前显著增高,治疗后24 h及48 h时较同组治疗后6 h时显著增高,且差异均有统计学意义(P<0.01),但治疗后24 h时与同组治疗后48 h时比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);③水平比较:两组在治疗后各时间点比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05);两组均在治疗后6 h时与同组治疗前比较及治疗后24 h时与同组治疗后48 h时比较,差异均无统计学意义(P> 0.05),但两组均在治疗后24 h、48 h时较同组治疗前及治疗后24 h、48 h时较同组治疗后6 h时显著降低,且差异均有统计学意义(P<0.01);④RI比较:NSIPPV组在治疗后6 h、24 h及48 h时均显著低于NCPAP组,且差异有统计学意义(P<0.01);两组治疗后每个时间点分别与同组前面比较,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.01);⑤两组再插管率及腹胀发生率比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05),但NSIPPV组经鼻通气时间显著少于NCPAP组,且差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),两组均无一例患儿发生支气管肺发育不良(BPD)、颅内出血及气漏。

结论

NSIPPV及NCPAP 2种无创通气摸式对治疗NRDS均有较好疗效,能显著改善肺部氧合功能,且二氧化碳储留均不明显;2种模式安全性均较好;NSIPPV较NCPAP更有效,经鼻通气时间更短,改善肺的通气及氧交换能力更强。

Objective

To investigate efficacy and safety of nasal synchronized intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NSIPPV) and nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP) after INSURE procedure in the treatment of neonatal respiratory distress syndrome (NRDS) in premature infants.

Methods

A total of 51 premature infants who were diagnosed as NRDS and required respiratory support hospitalization and treatment in neonatal department of Zhuzhou Maternal and Child Health Care Hospital of Hunan Province from January 2012 to July 2013 were chosen as study subjects. They were randomly assigned to NSIPPV group (n=25) and NCPAP group (n=26) in accordance with the respiratory support mode. The arterial oxygen pressure (), arterial carbon dioxide tension (), respiratory index (RI), complications and outcomes before respiratory support and 6 h, 24 h, 48 h after respiratory support between two groups were analyzed and compared. The study protocol was approved by the Ethical Review Board of Investigation in Human Beings of Zhuzhou Maternal and Child Health Care Hospital. Informed consent was obtained from the parents of each participating patient. The general clinical data such as gender, gestational age and birth weight between two groups had no statistically significant difference(P>0.05).

Results

The results of this study followed as:①The , and RI levels prior treatment between two groups had no statistically significant difference (P >0.05).② Comparison of level : There were no statistically significant difference between two groups 6 h and 24 h post-treatment (P > 0.05),but the level of NSIPPV group was statistically higher than that of NCPAP group 48 h post-treatment(P<0.01); The level in the two groups both were statistically higher compared 6 h, 24 h, 48 h post-treatment to prior treatment and compared 24 h, 48 h post-treatment to 6 h post-treatment in the same group(P<0.01),but compared 24 h post-treatment to 48 h post-treatment in the same group had no statistically significant difference(P>0.05).③Comparison of level:There were no statistically significant difference between two groups in three time points post-treatment(P>0.05) ; The level in the two groups both had no significant difference compared 6 h post-treatment to prior treatment and compared 24 h post-treatment to 48 h post-treatment in the same group (P > 0.05),but the level in the two groups both were statistically lower compared 24 h, 48 h post-treatment to prior treatment and compared 24 h, 48 h post-treatment to 6 h post-treatment in the same group(P<0.01).④Comparison of RI level: The RI level of NSIPPV group was statistically lower than that of NCPAP group at 6 h, 24 h, 48 h post-treatment(P< 0.01) ; The RI level in the two groups both were statistically lower compared each time point after treatment to any prior time point in the same group (P<0.01).⑤The reintubation rate and abdominal distension incidence between two groups had no statistically significant difference(P>0.05), but nasal ventilation time of NSIPPV group was statistically less than NCPAP group (P < 0.05). Both groups had no bronchial pulmonary dysplasia (BPD), intracranial hemorrhage and gas leakage.

Conclusions

NSIPPV and NCPAP two kinds of noninvasive ventilation mode for treatment of NRDS had a good effect, which can significantly improve lung oxygenation function. Carbon dioxide retention was not obvious. Both modes had better safety. NSIPPV was more efficient than NCPAP for treatment of NRDS, nasal ventilation time was shorter and the capacity to improve pulmonary ventilation and oxygen exchange was greater.

表1 两组治疗后不同时间点水平比较(mmHg,±s)
Table 1 Comparison of levels at different time points between two groups(mmHg, ±s)
表2 两组治疗后不同时间点水平比较(mmHg,±s)
Table 2 Comparison of levels at different time points between two groups(mmHg, ±s)
表3 两组治疗后不同时间点RI比较(±s)
Table 3 Comparison of RI at different time points between two groups(±s)
表4 两组并发症及呼吸支持治疗情况比较[n(%)]
Table 4 Comparison of complications and treatment of respiratory support between two groups[n(%)]
1
孙秀静,王丹华.新生儿呼吸窘迫综合征的管理-欧洲共识指南2010版[J].中国新生儿科杂志,2010,25(6):378-380.
2
邵肖梅,叶鸿瑁,邱小汕,主编.实用新生儿学.4版[M].北京:人民卫生出版社,2012:419-420.
3
Van Marter LJ, Allred EN, Pagono M, et al. Development epidemiology network: do clinical markers of barotraumas and oxygen toxicity explain inter hospital variation in rates of chronic lung disease? [J]. Pediatrics, 2000, 105(6):1194-1201.
4
Verder H, Bohlin K, Kamper J, et al. Nasal continuous positive airway pressure and surfactant for treatment of respiratory distress syndrome and prevention of bronchopulmonary dysplasia[J]. Acta Pediatr, 2009, 98(9):1400-1408.
5
吴玫,陈大鹏,熊英,等.新生儿经鼻持续气道正压通气对二氧化碳潴留的影响[J].中华妇幼临床医学杂志:电子版,2012,8(2):134-136.
6
Kiciman NM, Andréasson B, Bernstein G, et al. Thoracoabdominal motion in newborns during ventilation delivered by endotracheal tube or nasal prongs[J]. Pediatr Pulmonol, 1998, 25(3):175-181.
7
Tang SF, Zhao JN, Shen J, et al. Nasal intermittent positive-pressure ventilation versus nasal continuous positive airway pressure in neonates: a systematic review and Meta-analysis[J]. Indian Pediatr, 2013, 50(4):371-376.
8
Juhcille M, Vineet B, Joao GA. Nasal intermittent positive-pressure ventilation vs. nasal continuous positive airway pressure for preterm infants with respiratory distress syndrome: a systematic review and Meta-analysis[J]. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med, 2012, 166(4):372-376.
9
杨建生,吴本清,贺务实,等.经鼻间歇正压通气治疗早产儿呼吸窘迫综合征疗效观察[J].中国新生儿杂志,2011,26(5):315-318.
10
唐仕芳,赵锦宁,沈洁,等.经鼻间歇与持续气道正压通气治疗新生儿呼吸窘迫综合征的Meta分析[J].中国循证儿科杂志,2011,6(4):255-263.
[1] 戴瑞芝, 霍美池, 李峥. 无创高频振荡通气对早产儿呼吸窘迫综合征的临床疗效[J/OL]. 中华危重症医学杂志(电子版), 2022, 15(05): 372-378.
[2] 郭立珍, 范天群, 张欣凯, 蒋韵红, 金蓉, 刘冬云. 早产小于胎龄儿发生支气管肺发育不良的危险因素及预后分析[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2024, 20(02): 209-215.
[3] 田权秀, 韩爱民, 徐艳. 动脉导管未闭与极低出生体重早产儿支气管肺发育不良的相关性分析[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2023, 19(06): 675-682.
[4] 胡诤贇, 史建伟, 申建伟, 王冰, 蒋春苗, 刘冲. 基于机器学习鉴定早产儿支气管肺发育不良的关键基因[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2023, 19(04): 446-454.
[5] 李敏, 熊菲. 母乳成分及其影响因素的研究现状[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2023, 19(03): 267-272.
[6] 周美岑, 王华, 母得志. 早产儿疫苗预防接种及时性[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2023, 19(03): 261-266.
[7] 杨萍, 许世敏, 李亮亮, 尹向云, 锡洪敏, 马丽丽, 李向红. 早产儿支气管肺发育不良合并代谢性骨病的影响因素[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2023, 19(02): 202-211.
[8] 苏永维, 陈果. 早产儿非心脏手术的麻醉管理[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2023, 19(02): 139-144.
[9] 张霭润, 招嘉樑, 李管明, 李嘉鸿, 陈静蓉, 王兰, 庄思齐, 房晓祎. 早产儿RhE合并Rhc溶血病1例并文献复习[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2023, 19(01): 93-99.
[10] 张璐, 杨惠娟, 刘凯波. 2015—2021年北京市辅助生殖技术助孕活产及高龄孕母占比与不良妊娠结局变化趋势[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2023, 19(01): 46-53.
[11] 袁冰, 颜凯. 人羊膜上皮干细胞治疗早产儿支气管肺发育不良的研究现状[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2022, 18(06): 640-644.
[12] 伏洪玲, 刘瀚旻. 支气管肺发育不良及肺动脉高压有关信号通路研究现状[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2022, 18(05): 497-505.
[13] 张璐, 杨惠娟, 刘凯波. 影响双胎消失综合征存活儿围生期结局危险因素研究[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2022, 18(04): 400-409.
[14] 李子贤, 李向红, 孙梦雅, 李亮亮, 尹向云, 锡洪敏, 杨萍, 马丽丽. 早产单绒毛膜双胎新生儿坏死性小肠结肠炎临床特点分析及相关文献复习[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2022, 18(03): 343-349.
[15] 李磊, 白辉科, 许婉婷, 蒋依伶, 吴晨, 刘丽, 李德渊. 2种机械通气模式在极低出生体重早产儿呼吸窘迫综合征中的呼吸支持作用[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2022, 18(02): 198-204.
阅读次数
全文


摘要