Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29282094›Full record

ArticleItalian journal of pediatrics2017

Nasal high flow therapy in very low birth weight infants with mild respiratory distress syndrome: a single center experience.

Antonio Di Mauro, Manuela Capozza, Sergio Cotugno, Silvio Tafuri, Francesco Paolo Bianchi, Federico Schettini, Raffaella Panza, Nicola Laforgia

Abstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Italian journal of pediatrics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Observational
  7. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Antonio Di MauroNeonatology and Neonatal Intensive Care Unit, Department of Biomedical Science and Human Oncology, "Aldo Moro" University of Bari, Policlinico Hospital - Piazza Giulio Cesare n. 11, 70124, Bari, Italy. antonio.dimauro@uniba.it.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7052-9784
Manuela CapozzaNeonatology and Neonatal Intensive Care Unit, Department of Biomedical Science and Human Oncology, "Aldo Moro" University of Bari, Policlinico Hospital - Piazza Giulio Cesare n. 11, 70124, Bari, Italy.
Sergio CotugnoNeonatology and Neonatal Intensive Care Unit, Department of Biomedical Science and Human Oncology, "Aldo Moro" University of Bari, Policlinico Hospital - Piazza Giulio Cesare n. 11, 70124, Bari, Italy.
Silvio TafuriSection of Hygiene, Department of Biomedical Science and Human Oncology, "Aldo Moro" University of Bari, Bari, Italy.
Francesco Paolo BianchiSection of Hygiene, Department of Biomedical Science and Human Oncology, "Aldo Moro" University of Bari, Bari, Italy.
Federico SchettiniNeonatology and Neonatal Intensive Care Unit, Department of Biomedical Science and Human Oncology, "Aldo Moro" University of Bari, Policlinico Hospital - Piazza Giulio Cesare n. 11, 70124, Bari, Italy.
Raffaella PanzaNeonatology and Neonatal Intensive Care Unit, Department of Biomedical Science and Human Oncology, "Aldo Moro" University of Bari, Policlinico Hospital - Piazza Giulio Cesare n. 11, 70124, Bari, Italy.
Nicola LaforgiaNeonatology and Neonatal Intensive Care Unit, Department of Biomedical Science and Human Oncology, "Aldo Moro" University of Bari, Policlinico Hospital - Piazza Giulio Cesare n. 11, 70124, Bari, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPulmonary disorders and respiratory failure represent one of the most common morbidities of preterm newborns admitted to neonatal intensive care units (NICUs). The use of nasal high-flow therapy (nHFT) has been more recently introduced into the NICUs as a non-invasive respiratory (NIV) support.

methodsWe performed a retrospective study to evaluate safety and effectiveness of nHFT as primary support for infants born < 29 weeks of gestation and/or VLBW presenting with mild Respiratory Distress Syndrome (RDS). The main outcome was the percentage of patients that did not need mechanical ventilation. Secondary outcomes were rate of bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BDP), air leaks, nasal injury, late onset sepsis (LOS), intraventricular hemorrhage (IVH), retinopathy (ROP), necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC), hemodynamically-significant patent ductus arteriosus (PDA) and death.

resultsSixty-four preterm newborns were enrolled. Overall, 93% of enrolled patients did not need mechanical ventilation. In a subgroup analysis, 88.5% of infants < 29 weeks and 86.7% of infants ELBW (< 1000 g BW) did not need mechanical ventilation. BPD was diagnosed in 26.6% of preterms enrolled (Mild 20%, Moderate 4.5%, Severe 1.5%). In subgroup analysis, BPD was diagnosed in 53.9% of newborns with GA < 29 weeks, in 53.3% of ELBW newborns and in 11.1% of small for gestational age (SGA) newborns. Neither air leaks nor nasal injury were recorded as well as no exitus occurred. LOS, IVH, ROP, NEC and PDA occurred respectively in 16.1%, 0%, 7.8%, and 1.6% of newborns.

conclusionsAccording to our results, n-HFT seems to be effective as first respiratory support in preterm newborns with mild RDS. Further studies in a larger number of preterm newborns are required to confirm nHFT effectiveness in the acute phase of RDS.

Indexed as

Infant, Very Low Birth WeightCohort StudiesFemaleFollow-Up StudiesGestational AgeHumansInfant, NewbornIntensive Care Units, NeonatalMaleOxygenPositive-Pressure RespirationPregnancyRespiratory Distress Syndrome, NewbornRespiratory TherapyRetrospective StudiesRisk AssessmentOxygenNasal high flow therapyNeonatal respiratory distress syndromeVery low birth weight infants

Identifiers

PMID29282094
PMCPMC5745898

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.