Clinical research of different pulmonary surfactant administration techniques on premature infants with respiratory distress syndrome

doi:10.3877/cma.j.issn.1673-5250.2020.03.007

Objective

To investigate the efficacy, safety and prognosis of less invasive pulmonary surfactant administration (LISA) and intubation-surfactant-extubation (INSURE) techniques in the treatment of respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) in premature infants.

Methods

Twenty-six premature infants with RDS who underwent LISA technique at the Affiliated Hospital of Yangzhou University from January 1, 2018 to April 30, 2019 were included in LISA group, and 36 premature infants with RDS who underwent INSURE technique at same hospital from July 1, 2016 to December 31, 2017 were included into INSURE group. The gestational age, birth weight, and postnatal Apgar score of 2 groups were statistically compared by using independent-samples t test. The age at admission, nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP) duration, mechanical ventilation (MV) duration, total oxygen consumption time, hospital stay, hospitalization costs and fraction of inspiration oxygen (FiO₂) at different time points between 2 groups were statistically compared by Mann-Whitney U test. The pH value, partial pressure of oxygen in artery (PaO₂), and partial pressure of carbon dioxide (PaCO₂) between 2 groups were compared by the variance analysis of repeated measurement data; furthermore, overall comparison within groups were compared by one-way ANOVA, and least significant difference (LSD) method was used for further pairwise comparison within groups. The Friedman rank sum test was used for within-group comparisons of FiO₂ at different time points. The gender composition ratio, cesarean section rate, transfe rate from other hospitals, maternal prenatal hormone use rate and incidence of related adverse reactions between 2 groups were compared by chi-square test, continuity correction of chi-square test or Fisher′s exact test. The procedures followed in this study was in accordance with the ethical standards established by the Human Beings Test Committee of Affiliated Hospital of Yangzhou University, and was approved by the committee (Approval No. 2020-YKL05-003). Informed consent was obtained from each participate′s parents.

Results

①There were no statistically significant differences in the gender composition ratio, gestational age, birth weight, modes of delivery, pregnancy rate of twins, age at admission, Apgar score after birth, transfer rate from other hospitals and maternal prenatal hormone use rate between 2 groups (P>0.05). ②No death occurred in 2 groups of RDS preterm infants. The median duration of MV (0) and total oxygen consumption time [84 h (45-180 h)] were significantly shorter than those of INSURE group [0 h (0-80 h), 137 h (107-235 h)], there were significantly statistical differences (Z=2.877, 1.991; P=0.004, 0.047). There were no differences between 2 groups in the aspects of NCPAP duration, MV rate within 72 h after birth, hospital stay, costs and incidence of different complications (P>0.05). ③The comparison results of pH value, PaO₂ and PaCO₂ levels before and after the treatment between 2 groups showed that there were no interactions between treatment measures and determination time factors (F_{treatment × time} = 1.751, P=0.152, F_{treatment × time} =0.338, P=0.852, F_{treatment × time}=0.396, P=0.810). The pH value, PaO₂ and PaCO₂ levels of children in LISA group before and at 1, 8, 24, 48 h after treatment were compared with each other in the group as a whole, and the differences were statistically significant (pH value: F=47.318, P<0.001, PaO₂: F=30.37, P<0.001, PaCO₂: F=27.140, P<0.001). The pH value, PaO₂ and PaCO₂ levels of children in INSURE group before and at 1, 8, 24, 48 h after treatment were compared with each other in the group as a whole, and the differences were statistically significant (pH value: F=20.773, P<0.001, PaO₂: F=16.976, P<0.001, PaCO₂: F=23.016, P<0.001). The pH value, PaO₂ and PaCO₂ levels of 2 groups were compared before PS treatment and at 1, 8, 24, 48 h after PS treatment respectively, and there were no statistically significant differences (P>0.05). ④ There were significant differences in FiO₂ at 0.5, 1, 6, 12, 24, and 48 h after PS treatment in 2 groups (LISA group: χ² = 131.108, P<0.001; INSURE group: χ²=81.589, P<0.001). The FiO₂ at 1, 6, 12, 24, and 48 h after treatment were significantly different from those before treatment (P<0.05). Compared with pre-treatment, there were significant differences in FiO₂ at 1, 6, 12, 24 and 48 h after treatment in 2 groups, respectively (P<0.05). There were no significant differences between 2 groups of FiO₂ before PS treatment and 0.5, 1 and 6 h after PS treatment (P>0.05). The FiO₂ of LISA group was lower than that in INSURE group at 12, 24 and 48 h after PS treatment, and the difference were statistically significant (Z=3.315, 4.312, 4.280, P=0.001, <0.001, <0.001). ⑤ There were 18 cases (69.2%) without adverse reactions after treatment in LISA group, and 27 cases (75.0%) in INSURE group. There was no statistically significant difference between 2 groups (χ²=0.252, P=0.615). In addition, there was no significant difference in the incidence of adverse reactions such as transcutaneous oxygen saturation(TcSO₂)<85% and bradycardia between 2 groups during PS administration (P>0.05).

Conclusions

LISA technique can shorten MV duration and total oxygen consumption time in premature infants with RDS, and does not increase the adverse prognosis.

Key words: Respiratory distress syndrome, newborn, Pulmonary surfactant, Less invasive surfactant administration, Blood gas analysis, Continuous positive airway pressure, Infant, premature

表1 2组RDS早产儿一般临床资料比较

组别	例数	性别[例数(%)]		分娩胎龄(周，±s)	出生体重(g，±s)	剖宫产术分娩[例数(%)]	双胎[例数(%)]	入院时年龄[生后时间(h)，M(P₂₅～P₇₅)]
组别	例数	男	女	分娩胎龄(周，±s)	出生体重(g，±s)	剖宫产术分娩[例数(%)]	双胎[例数(%)]	入院时年龄[生后时间(h)，M(P₂₅～P₇₅)]
LISA组	26	16(61.5)	10(38.5)	31.6±2.7	1 876±646	16(61.5)	5(19.2)	1.5(0.9～2.5)
INSURE组	36	26(72.2)	10(27.8)	31.8±2.3	1 956±623	20(55.5)	7(19.4)	1.6(0.5～2.7)
检验值		χ²＝0.789		t＝0.326	t＝0.488	χ²＝0.222	χ²＝0.000	Z＝0.179
P值		0.375		0.746	0.628	0.638	0.983	0.858
组别	例数	生后Apgar评分(分，±s)		外院转入[例数(%)]	母亲产前使用激素[例数(%)]	开始NCPAP年龄[生后时间(h)，M(P₂₅～P₇₅)]	首剂PS应用时间[生后时间(h)，M(P₂₅～P₇₅)]
组别	例数	1 min	5 min	外院转入[例数(%)]	母亲产前使用激素[例数(%)]	开始NCPAP年龄[生后时间(h)，M(P₂₅～P₇₅)]	首剂PS应用时间[生后时间(h)，M(P₂₅～P₇₅)]
LISA组	26	8.3±1.4	8.8±1.7	10(38.4)	12(46.2)	1.5(0.5～2.1)	3.0(2.0～4.3)
INSURE组	36	7.8±1.7	8.3±1.7	13(36.1)	11(30.5)	2.0(0.5～2.9)	4.0(2.3～6.0)
检验值		t＝1.229	t＝1.403	χ²＝0.036	χ²＝1.574	Z＝0.524	Z＝1.662
P值		0.638	0.210	0.224	0.983	0.600	0.096

表1 2组RDS早产儿一般临床资料比较

组别	例数	性别[例数(%)]		分娩胎龄(周，±s)	出生体重(g，±s)	剖宫产术分娩[例数(%)]	双胎[例数(%)]	入院时年龄[生后时间(h)，M(P₂₅～P₇₅)]
组别	例数	男	女	分娩胎龄(周，±s)	出生体重(g，±s)	剖宫产术分娩[例数(%)]	双胎[例数(%)]	入院时年龄[生后时间(h)，M(P₂₅～P₇₅)]
LISA组	26	16(61.5)	10(38.5)	31.6±2.7	1 876±646	16(61.5)	5(19.2)	1.5(0.9～2.5)
INSURE组	36	26(72.2)	10(27.8)	31.8±2.3	1 956±623	20(55.5)	7(19.4)	1.6(0.5～2.7)
检验值		χ²＝0.789		t＝0.326	t＝0.488	χ²＝0.222	χ²＝0.000	Z＝0.179
P值		0.375		0.746	0.628	0.638	0.983	0.858
组别	例数	生后Apgar评分(分，±s)		外院转入[例数(%)]	母亲产前使用激素[例数(%)]	开始NCPAP年龄[生后时间(h)，M(P₂₅～P₇₅)]	首剂PS应用时间[生后时间(h)，M(P₂₅～P₇₅)]
组别	例数	1 min	5 min	外院转入[例数(%)]	母亲产前使用激素[例数(%)]	开始NCPAP年龄[生后时间(h)，M(P₂₅～P₇₅)]	首剂PS应用时间[生后时间(h)，M(P₂₅～P₇₅)]
LISA组	26	8.3±1.4	8.8±1.7	10(38.4)	12(46.2)	1.5(0.5～2.1)	3.0(2.0～4.3)
INSURE组	36	7.8±1.7	8.3±1.7	13(36.1)	11(30.5)	2.0(0.5～2.9)	4.0(2.3～6.0)
检验值		t＝1.229	t＝1.403	χ²＝0.036	χ²＝1.574	Z＝0.524	Z＝1.662
P值		0.638	0.210	0.224	0.983	0.600	0.096

表2 2组RDS早产儿治疗时间、并发症发生情况及出院转归等比较

组别	例数	生后72 h内接受MV治疗[例数(%)]	NCPAP时间[h，M(P₂₅～P₇₅)]	MV治疗时间[h，M(P₂₅～P₇₅)]	总用氧时间[h，M(P₂₅～P₇₅)]	住院时间[d，M(P₂₅～P₇₅)]	住院费用[万元，M(P₂₅～P₇₅)]
LISA组	26	1(3.8)	72(48～115)	0(0～0)	84(45～180)	20.0(12.8～30.5)	2.79(1.84～5.00)
INSURE组	36	9(25.0)	63(36～110)	0(0～80)	137(107～235)	23.5(15.3～37.8)	3.75(2.25～5.24)
检验值		χ²＝3.553^a	Z＝1.224	Z＝2.877	Z＝1.991	Z＝1.242	Z＝0.913
P值		0.059	0.214	0.004	0.047	0.214	0.361
组别	例数	并发症[例数(%)]			治愈[例数(%)]	转院[例数(%)]	需使用第2剂PS[例数(%)]
组别	例数	气胸	BPD	Ⅲ～Ⅳ级颅内出血	治愈[例数(%)]	转院[例数(%)]	需使用第2剂PS[例数(%)]
LISA组	26	1(3.8)	1(3.8)	4(15.4)	25(96.2)	1(3.8)	1(3.8)
INSURE组	36	1(2.8)	1(2.8)	10(27.8)	35(97.2)	1(2.8)	7(19.4)
检验值		—	—	χ²＝1.326	—	—	χ²＝2.028^a
P值		1.000	1.000	0.249	1.000	1.000	0.154

表2 2组RDS早产儿治疗时间、并发症发生情况及出院转归等比较

组别	例数	生后72 h内接受MV治疗[例数(%)]	NCPAP时间[h，M(P₂₅～P₇₅)]	MV治疗时间[h，M(P₂₅～P₇₅)]	总用氧时间[h，M(P₂₅～P₇₅)]	住院时间[d，M(P₂₅～P₇₅)]	住院费用[万元，M(P₂₅～P₇₅)]
LISA组	26	1(3.8)	72(48～115)	0(0～0)	84(45～180)	20.0(12.8～30.5)	2.79(1.84～5.00)
INSURE组	36	9(25.0)	63(36～110)	0(0～80)	137(107～235)	23.5(15.3～37.8)	3.75(2.25～5.24)
检验值		χ²＝3.553^a	Z＝1.224	Z＝2.877	Z＝1.991	Z＝1.242	Z＝0.913
P值		0.059	0.214	0.004	0.047	0.214	0.361
组别	例数	并发症[例数(%)]			治愈[例数(%)]	转院[例数(%)]	需使用第2剂PS[例数(%)]
组别	例数	气胸	BPD	Ⅲ～Ⅳ级颅内出血	治愈[例数(%)]	转院[例数(%)]	需使用第2剂PS[例数(%)]
LISA组	26	1(3.8)	1(3.8)	4(15.4)	25(96.2)	1(3.8)	1(3.8)
INSURE组	36	1(2.8)	1(2.8)	10(27.8)	35(97.2)	1(2.8)	7(19.4)
检验值		—	—	χ²＝1.326	—	—	χ²＝2.028^a
P值		1.000	1.000	0.249	1.000	1.000	0.154

表3 2组RDS早产儿PS治疗前、后不同时间点血气分析指标组间及组内比较(±s)

组别	例数	动脉血pH值					F值	P值
组别	例数	治疗前	治疗后1 h	治疗后8 h	治疗后24 h	治疗后48 h	F值	P值
LISA组	26	7.2±0.1	7.3±0.1	7.3±0.1	7.4±0.1	7.4±0.1	47.318	<0.001
INSURE组	36	7.2±0.1	7.3±0.1	7.3±0.1	7.3±0.1	7.3±0.1	20.773	<0.001
t值		0.008	0.015	0.010	0.017	0.029
P值		0.641	0.472	0.614	0.244	0.101
组别	例数	PaO₂ (mmHg)					F值	P值
组别	例数	治疗前	治疗后1 h	治疗后8 h	治疗后24 h	治疗后48 h	F值	P值
LISA组	26	46.1±12.9	76.0±13.2	73.1±13.6	74.5±14.4	70.3±12.1	30.370	<0.001
INSURE组	36	47.1±14.6	73.2±20.8	69.3±18.1	70.6±15.9	66.9±11.2	16.976	<0.001
t值		1.034	2.816	3.821	3.917	3.408
P值		0.773	0.547	0.369	0.324	0.256
组别	例数	PaCO₂(mmHg)					F值	P值
组别	例数	治疗前	治疗后1 h	治疗后8 h	治疗后24 h	治疗后48 h	F值	P值
LISA组	26	63.0±11.2	51.8±8.4	44.3±9.8	42.8±11.9	41.9±5.6	27.140	<0.001
INSURE组	36	63.6±12.6	52.0±16.4	45.5±12.4	44.3±7.6	45.8±7.8	23.016	<0.001
t值		0.600	0.154	1.209	1.459	0.487
P值		0.847	0.965	0.681	0.561	0.767

表3 2组RDS早产儿PS治疗前、后不同时间点血气分析指标组间及组内比较(±s)

组别	例数	动脉血pH值					F值	P值
组别	例数	治疗前	治疗后1 h	治疗后8 h	治疗后24 h	治疗后48 h	F值	P值
LISA组	26	7.2±0.1	7.3±0.1	7.3±0.1	7.4±0.1	7.4±0.1	47.318	<0.001
INSURE组	36	7.2±0.1	7.3±0.1	7.3±0.1	7.3±0.1	7.3±0.1	20.773	<0.001
t值		0.008	0.015	0.010	0.017	0.029
P值		0.641	0.472	0.614	0.244	0.101
组别	例数	PaO₂ (mmHg)					F值	P值
组别	例数	治疗前	治疗后1 h	治疗后8 h	治疗后24 h	治疗后48 h	F值	P值
LISA组	26	46.1±12.9	76.0±13.2	73.1±13.6	74.5±14.4	70.3±12.1	30.370	<0.001
INSURE组	36	47.1±14.6	73.2±20.8	69.3±18.1	70.6±15.9	66.9±11.2	16.976	<0.001
t值		1.034	2.816	3.821	3.917	3.408
P值		0.773	0.547	0.369	0.324	0.256
组别	例数	PaCO₂(mmHg)					F值	P值
组别	例数	治疗前	治疗后1 h	治疗后8 h	治疗后24 h	治疗后48 h	F值	P值
LISA组	26	63.0±11.2	51.8±8.4	44.3±9.8	42.8±11.9	41.9±5.6	27.140	<0.001
INSURE组	36	63.6±12.6	52.0±16.4	45.5±12.4	44.3±7.6	45.8±7.8	23.016	<0.001
t值		0.600	0.154	1.209	1.459	0.487
P值		0.847	0.965	0.681	0.561	0.767

表4 2组RDS早产儿PS治疗前、后不同时间点FiO₂组内及组间比较[M(P₂₅～P₇₅)]

组别	例数	治疗前	治疗后						χ ²值	P值
组别	例数	治疗前	0.5 h	1 h	6 h	12 h	24 h	48 h	χ ²值	P值
LISA组	26	0.40(0.35～0.40)	0.35(0.30～0.35)	0.30(0.30～0.30)	0.30(0.25～0.30)	0.25(0.21～0.30)	0.21(0.21～0.25)	0.21(0.21～0.25)	131.108	<0.001
INSURE组	36	0.35(0.35～0.40)	0.30(0.30～0.38)	0.30(0.28～0.35)	0.30(0.25～0.34)	0.30(0.25～0.32)	0.30(0.25～0.35)	0.25(0.25～0.35)	81.589	<0.001
Z值		1.318	0.769	0.456	1.401	3.315	4.312	4.280
P值		0.187	0.442	0.648	0.161	0.001	<0.001	<0.001

表4 2组RDS早产儿PS治疗前、后不同时间点FiO₂组内及组间比较[M(P₂₅～P₇₅)]

组别	例数	治疗前	治疗后						χ ²值	P值
组别	例数	治疗前	0.5 h	1 h	6 h	12 h	24 h	48 h	χ ²值	P值
LISA组	26	0.40(0.35～0.40)	0.35(0.30～0.35)	0.30(0.30～0.30)	0.30(0.25～0.30)	0.25(0.21～0.30)	0.21(0.21～0.25)	0.21(0.21～0.25)	131.108	<0.001
INSURE组	36	0.35(0.35～0.40)	0.30(0.30～0.38)	0.30(0.28～0.35)	0.30(0.25～0.34)	0.30(0.25～0.32)	0.30(0.25～0.35)	0.25(0.25～0.35)	81.589	<0.001
Z值		1.318	0.769	0.456	1.401	3.315	4.312	4.280
P值		0.187	0.442	0.648	0.161	0.001	<0.001	<0.001

表5 2组RDS早产儿接受PS治疗后不良反应发生率比较[例数(%)]

组别	例数	TcSO₂<85%	心动过缓	PS反流	气管插管所致损伤
LISA组	26	4(15.4)	2(7.7)	3(11.5)	0(0)
INSURE组	36	6(16.7)	3(8.3)	0(0)	3(8.3)
χ²值		0.000^a	0.000^a	2.219^a	0.827^a
P值		1.000	1.000	0.136	0.363

表5 2组RDS早产儿接受PS治疗后不良反应发生率比较[例数(%)]

组别	例数	TcSO₂<85%	心动过缓	PS反流	气管插管所致损伤
LISA组	26	4(15.4)	2(7.7)	3(11.5)	0(0)
INSURE组	36	6(16.7)	3(8.3)	0(0)	3(8.3)
χ²值		0.000^a	0.000^a	2.219^a	0.827^a
P值		1.000	1.000	0.136	0.363

[1]	王华，母得志. 新生儿呼吸窘迫综合征的通气策略 [J/CD] . 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版)，2017，13(1): 10-13. DOI: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1673-5250.2017.01.002.
[2]	邱其周，程贵辉，陈虹余，等．不同通气模式对新生儿呼吸窘迫综合征患儿临床康复的影响 [J/CD]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版)，2016，12(2): 206-210. DOI: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1673-5250.2016.02.014.
[3]	中国城市多中心早产儿呼吸窘迫综合征调查协作组. 住院分娩早产儿呼吸窘迫综合征：中国13家医院的回顾性调查 [J]. 中华围产医学杂志，2016，19(10): 743-754. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1007-9408.2016.10.006.
[4]	Sweet DG, Carnielli V, Greisen G, et al. European consensus guidelines on the management of respiratory distress syndrome - 2016 update [J]. Neonatology, 2017, 111(2): 107-125. DOI: 10.1159/000448985.
[5]	Göpel W, Kribs A, Ziegler A, et al. Avoidance of mechanical ventilation by surfactant treatment of spontaneously breathing preterm infants (AMV): an open-label, randomised, controlled trial [J]. Lancet, 2011, 378(9803): 1627-1634. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(11)60986-0.
[6]	Kribs A, Roll C, Göpel W, et al. Nonintubated surfactant application vs conventional therapy in extremely preterm infants: a randomized clinical trial [J]. JAMA Pediatr, 2015, 169(8): 723-730. DOI: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2015.0504.
[7]	Klotz D, Porcaro U, Fleck T, et al. European perspective on less invasive surfactant administration-a survey [J]. Eur J Pediatr, 2017, 176(2): 147-154. DOI: 10.1007/s00431-016-2812-9.
[8]	Kurepa D, Perveen S, Lipener Y, et al. The use of less invasive surfactant administration (LISA) in the United States with review of the literature [J]. J Perinatol, 2019, 39(3): 426-432. DOI: 10.1038/s41372-018-0302-9.
[9]	Bao Y, Zhang G, Wu M, et al. A pilot study of less invasive surfactant administration in very preterm infants in a Chinese tertiary center [J]. BMC Pediatr, 2015, 15: 21. DOI: 10.1186/s12887-015-0342-7.
[10]	卢维城，魏海波，陈有平. 经胃管微创注入肺表面活性物质在新生儿呼吸窘迫综合征中的应用 [J]. 广东医学，2016，37(21): 3233-3235. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-9448.2016.21.025.
[11]	刘艳红，赵先锋，梁桂娟，等. LISA技术治疗早产儿呼吸窘迫综合征临床观察 [J]. 儿科药学杂志，2018，24(5): 21-24. DOI: 10.13407/j.cnki.jpp.1672-108X.2018.05.007.
[12]	荣箫，周伟，赵小朋，等. 微创肺表面活性物质治疗在新生儿呼吸窘迫综合征中的疗效与安全性 [J]. 中华实用儿科临床杂志，2018，33(14): 1071-1074. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.2095-428X.2018.14.007.
[13]	邵肖梅，叶鸿瑁，丘小汕．实用新生儿学[M]. 5版．北京：人民卫生出版社，2019.
[14]	中国医师协会新生儿科医师分会，孔祥永，封志纯，等. 早产儿呼吸窘迫综合征早期防治专家共识 [J]．发育医学电子杂志，2017，5(3): 129-131. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.2095-5340.2017.03.002.
[15]	孔令凯，孔祥永，李丽华，等. 双水平正压通气和经鼻持续气道正压通气在早产儿呼吸窘迫综合征INSURE治疗方式中应用的比较 [J/CD] . 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版)，2013，9(5): 579-585. DOI: 10.3969/cma.j.issn.1673-5250.2013.05.002.
[16]	Dani C, Bertini G, Pezzati M, et al. Early extubation and nasal continuous positive airway pressure after surfactant treatment for respiratory distress syndrome among preterm infants <30 weeks′ gestation [J]. Pediatrics, 2004, 113(6): e560-563. DOI: 10.1542/peds.113.6.e560.
[17]	徐芬，罗俊，黎红平，等. LISA技术治疗新生儿呼吸窘迫综合征有效性的系统评价 [J]. 临床儿科杂志，2017，35(3): 223-228. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-3606.2017.03.017.
[18]	O′Donnell CP, Kamlin CO, Davis PG, et al. Endotracheal intubation attempts during neonatal resuscitation: success rates, duration, and adverse effects [J]. Pediatrics, 2006, 117(1): e16-21. DOI: 10.1542/peds.2005-0901.
[19]	Kribs A, Roll C, Göpel W, et al. Nonintubated surfactant application vs conventional therapy in extremely preterm infants: a randomized clinical trial [J]. JAMA Pediatr, 2015, 169(8): 723-730. DOI: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2015.050.
[20]	Vento M, Bohlin K, Herting E, et al. Surfactant administration via thin catheter: a practical guide [J]. Neonatology, 2019, 116(3): 211-226. DOI: 10.1159/000502610.
[21]	Lista G, La Verde A, Castoldi F. LISA: surfactant administration in spontaneous breathing. Which evidence from the literature? [J]. Acta Biomed, 2015, 86 (Suppl 1): 24-26.
[22]	朱佳骏. LISA/MIST技术与早产儿呼吸系统疾病的预后 [J]. 中国实用儿科杂志，2018，33(5): 338-341. DOI: 10.19538/j.ek2018050605.
[23]	Lista G, Bresesti I, Fabbri L. Is less invasive surfactant administration necessary or " only" helpful or just a fashion? [J]. Am J Perinatol, 2018, 35(6): 530-533. DOI: 10.1055/s-0038-1637759.
[24]	Jeffreys E, Hunt K, Dassios T, et al. UK survey of less invasive surfactant administration [J]. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed, 2019, 104(5): F567. DOI: 10.1136/archdischild-2018-316466.
[25]	Bohlin K, Bouhafs RK, Jarstrand C, et al. Spontaneous breathing or mechanical ventilation alters lung compliance and tissue association of exogenous surfactant in preterm newborn rabbits [J]. Pediatr Res, 2005, 57(5 Pt 1): 624-630. DOI: 10.1203/01.PDR.0000156502.84909.BC.
[26]	Buyuktiryaki M, Alarcon-Martinez T, Simsek GK, et al. Five-year single center experience on surfactant treatment in preterm infants with respiratory distress syndrome: LISA vs INSURE [J]. Early Hum Dev, 2019, 135: 32-36. DOI: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2019.06.004.
[27]	Halim A, Shirazi H, Riaz S，et al. Less invasive surfactant administration in preterm infants with respiratory distress syndrome [J]. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak, 2019, 29(3): 226-330. DOI: 10.29271/jcpsp.2019.03.226.
[28]	Christine SM, Chamberlain RS, Sun S. Less invasive surfactant administration reduces the need for mechanical ventilation in preterm infants: a Meta-analysis [J]. Glob Pediatr Health, 2017, 4: 2333794X17696683. DOI: 10.1177/2333794X17696683.
[29]	Aldana-Aguirre JC, Pinto M, Featherstone RM, et al. Less invasive surfactant administration versus intubation for surfactant delivery in preterm infants with respiratory distress syndrome: a systematic review and Meta-analysis [J]. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed, 2017, 102(1): F17-F23. DOI: 10.1136/archdischild-2015-310299.
[30]	游芳，任雪云，牛峰海，等．LISA技术与INSURE技术在早产儿呼吸窘迫综合征应用疗效的比较 [J]．中华新生儿科杂志，2019，34(4): 254-258.DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.2096-2932.2019.04.003.
[31]	Klebermass-Schrehof K, Wald M, Schwindt J, et al. Less invasive surfactant administration in extremely preterm infants: impact on mortality and morbidity [J]. Neonatology, 2013, 103(4): 252-258. DOI: 10.1159/000346521.
[32]	Baraldi E, Filippone M. Chronic lung disease after premature birth [J]. N Engl J Med, 2007, 357(19): 1946-1955. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMra067279.
[33]	Jobe AH. The new bronchopulmonary dysplasia [J]. Curr Opin Pediatr, 2011, 23(2): 167-172. DOI: 10.1097/MOP.0b013e3283423e6b.
[34]	de Kort EH, Hanff LM, Roofthooft D, et al. Insufficient sedation and severe side effects after fast administration of remifentanil during INSURE in preterm newborns [J]. Neonatology, 2017, 111(2): 172-176. DOI: 10.1159/000450536.

[1]	Wenlin Li, Ling Yang, Kaihui Xing, Caihua Chen, Lihua Zhong, Yaqin Zhang, Wei Zhang. Analysis of early diagnostic value of umbilical artery blood gas analysis combined with amplitude integrated electroencephalography in neonatal asphyxia brain injury[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2023, 19(05): 550-558.
[2]	Li Lyu, Lina Qiao. Effects of high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy to children with severe pneumonia[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2023, 19(01): 38-45.
[3]	Lei Li, Huike Bai, Yiling Jiang, Chen Wu, Wanting Xu, Li Liu, Deyuan Li. The role of 2 modes of mechanical ventilation for respiratory support in very low birth weight preterm infants with respiratory distress syndrome[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2022, 18(02): 198-204.
[4]	Yan Wang, Fengjun Guo, Wenhui Zha, Chang Liu, Yaping Luan, Fuju Wu. Clinical application values of pulmonary artery blood flow indexes and pulmonary surfactant protein level for perinatal lung maturity when pregnant women complicated with severe preeclampsia and gestational diabetes mellitus[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2021, 17(06): 692-698.
[5]	Jingfang Zhai, Jiebin Wu, Xiao Liu, bao Jin, Yanbo Wang, Yang Chen, Yun Wang, Guangling Zhou, Bin Zhou. Application of noninvasive high frequency oscillation ventilation in initial respiratory support of very low birth weight premature infants with respiratory distress syndrome[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2021, 17(05): 598-605.
[6]	Zijun Chen, Han Huang. Comparison of norepinephrine and phenylephrine for preventing and treating intraspinal anesthesia induced hypotension during cesarean section: a Meta-analysis[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2021, 17(02): 171-180.
[7]	Yali Xu, Wei Wang, Qi Yang, Jun Zhu. Effect of carbon dioxide partial pressure and lactic acid on prognosis of acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in elderly patients with blood gas analysis[J]. Chinese Journal of Lung Diseases(Electronic Edition), 2020, 13(06): 769-772.
[8]	Shijun Wen, Yunhuan Zhang, Chengyuan Li. Value of PS combined with bi-level continuous positive airway pressure in the treatment of preterm infants with NRDS[J]. Chinese Journal of Lung Diseases(Electronic Edition), 2020, 13(06): 755-759.
[9]	Zhiying Yin, Hao Wang, Yongqiang Li, Yujuan Wang, Shixia Ma, Siqing Ma. Expression and effect of pulmonary surfactant protein-D in the occurrence and development of high altitude pulmonary edema[J]. Chinese Journal of Critical Care & Intensive Care Medicine(Electronic Edition), 2022, 08(03): 235-239.
[10]	Ruiqi Li, Zijian Wu, Jiebin Wu, Jiajia Ren, Jingfang Zhai. Application of Excel spreadsheet-based arterial blood gas analysis in teaching of acid-base balance disorder among interns[J]. Chinese Journal of Clinicians(Electronic Edition), 2023, 17(06): 737-743.
[11]	Fei Xu, Ya Jiang, Chao Liu, Yao Wu, Bing Li. Effect of sequential blood purification combined with naloxone on blood gas parameters, hemorheology, and inflammatory factors in patients with acute poisoning[J]. Chinese Journal of Clinicians(Electronic Edition), 2022, 16(03): 236-240.
[12]	Hao Wang, Wenhui Guang, Siqing Ma. Arterial and central venous blood gas changes in patients with normal cardiopulmonary function in Xining Area[J]. Chinese Journal of Clinicians(Electronic Edition), 2021, 15(08): 601-604.
[13]	Haiying Huang, Bo Chen, Qiang Zhou. Teaching application of blood gas and acid-base imbalance analysis software in clinical medical laboratory specialty Huang Haiying, Chen Bo, Zhou Qiang, Ji Tianxing, Lin Zhen, Chen Jingnan. The Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou Guangdong 510260, China[J]. Chinese Journal of Clinical Laboratory Management(Electronic Edition), 2022, 10(03): 187-191.
[14]	qi Tian. Change of serum Clara cell secretory protein 16, tumor necrosis factor-α, interleukin-6 and pulmonary surfactant protein D in children with severe pneumonia[J]. Chinese Journal of Diagnostics(Electronic Edition), 2021, 09(03): 192-196.
[15]	Jinrong Zhao, Mingming Wang, Ying Yang. Clinical effect of qianjinweizhang decoction and Xuebijing injection on patients with severe pneumonia[J]. Chinese Journal of Hygiene Rescue(Electronic Edition), 2021, 07(02): 86-89.

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Please choose a citation manager

Content to export