...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Pediatrics: Official Publication of the American Academy of Pediatrics >A prospective randomized, controlled trial comparing synchronized nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation versus nasal continuous positive airway pressure as modes of extubation.
【24h】

A prospective randomized, controlled trial comparing synchronized nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation versus nasal continuous positive airway pressure as modes of extubation.

机译：一项前瞻性随机对照试验，比较了同步鼻间歇正压通气与鼻持续气道正压通气作为拔管方式。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether synchronized nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (SNIPPV) would decrease extubation failure compared with nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP) in preterm infants being ventilated for respiratory distress syndrome (RDS). METHODS: Infants who were /=0.5 mL/kg/cm H(2)O and expiratory airway resistance of 70 cm H(2)O/L/s), successful extubation was seen in 93% (27 of 29) in the SNIPPV group and 60% (15 of 25) in the NCPAP group. When weight was controlled for at the time of extubation, the odds of success in the SNIPPV group were 21.1 times higher (95% confidence interval: 3.4, 130.1) than that of the NCPAP group. CONCLUSIONS: SNIPPV is more effective than NCPAP in weaning infants with RDS from the ventilator. PFT may be useful in predicting successful extubation.
机译：目的：确定与呼吸持续窘迫综合征（RDS）进行通气的早产儿相比，同步鼻间歇性正压通气（SNIPPV）是否能降低拔管失败，而不是鼻持续气道正压通气（NCPAP）。方法：≤34周胎龄且接受RDS通气的婴儿在拔管后随机分为SNIPPV或NCPAP。拔管的标准是吸气峰值为 / = 0.5 mL / kg / cm H（2）O，呼气道阻力为 70 cm H（2）O / L / s）中，有93％的患者成功拔管（ SNIPPV组中的27个中的27个）和NCPAP组中的60％（25中的15个）。拔管时控制体重后，SNIPPV组的成功几率是NCPAP组的21.1倍（95％置信区间：3.4、130.1）。结论：SNIPPV比NCPAP更有效地治疗了来自呼吸机的RDS的断奶婴儿。 PFT对预测拔管成功可能有用。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号