SynthesisFrontiers in pediatrics2024
Efficacy and safety of different noninvasive ventilation strategies for postextubation respiratory support in Neonatal Respiratory Distress Syndrome: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in pediatrics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of different noninvasive ventilation (NIV) modalities as primary respiratory support following extubation in Neonatal Respiratory Distress Syndrome (NRDS). Methods: A search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Network (CNKI), Wanfang database, VIP, and Chinese Biomedical Literature databases with a search time limit of April 2024 for the year of construction, and included randomized controlled clinical trials of different modes of noninvasive respiratory support after extubation in NRDS. The primary outcome indicators were the need for re-tracheal intubation within 72 h of extubation on noninvasive ventilatory support and carbon dioxide retention (PCO2) 24 h after extubation. Secondary outcome indicators included the incidence of bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD), nasal injury, pneumothorax, intraventricular hemorrhage (IVH) or periventricular white matter softening (PVL), retinopathy of prematurity (ROP), necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC), and mortality rate. A systematic review and network meta-analysis of the literature was performed by two investigators who screened, extracted, and evaluated the quality of the data. A systematic review and network meta-analysis were then performed using R software. Results: A total of 23 studies involving 2,331 neonates were analyzed. These studies examined four noninvasive respiratory modalities: continuous positive airway pressure ventilation (NCPAP), noninvasive intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV), bi-level positive airway pressure ventilation (N-BiPAP), and noninvasive high-frequency oscillatory ventilation (NHFOV). Results indicated that NHFOV, NIPPV, and N-BiPAP were significantly more effective than NCPAP in reducing the risk of reintubation (all Conclusions: This network meta-analysis (NMA) suggested that NHFOV is the most effective mode of noninvasive respiratory support post-extubation, while NCPAP is the least effective. However, these findings should be interpreted with caution due to the limited number and quality of the studies included. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/#recordDetails, identifier (CRD42024544886).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.