ArticleClinical and experimental pediatrics2025
Less invasive surfactant administration versus intubation-surfactant-extubation: a single-center retrospective study.
Article in Clinical and experimental pediatrics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn recent years, minimally invasive methods have been increasingly utilized for surfactant administration in spontaneously breathing preterm infants with respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) managed with nasal continuous positive airway pressure owing to their feasibility and association with improved respiratory outcomes. However, data are limited from developing countries on the use and effectiveness of these techniques. PURPOSE: The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of less invasive surfactant administration (LISA) and intubation-surfactant-extubation (InSurE) techniques on the need for intubation and invasive mechanical ventilation (MV) within 72 hours of surfactant administration in preterm neonates with RDS. The secondary objectives were the effects of these methods on the need for a second surfactant dose, mortality rate, and other preterm morbidities.
methodsThis retrospective observational study was conducted in Southern India over 5 years. Clinical outcomes were analyzed in neonates with RDS at 24-34 weeks' gestation who received surfactants via the LISA or InSurE method.
resultsA total of 98 neonates were divided into the LISA group (n=54) and the InSurE group (n=44). The need for intubation and MV within 72 hours was significantly lower in the LISA versus InSurE group (18% vs. 64%, P=0.04; relative risk, 0.28; 95% confidence interval, 0.16-0.53). The duration of invasive ventilation was significantly shorter in the LISA group (P<0.001). We observed no significant intergroup differences in the need for a second surfactant dose (17% vs. 7%, P=0.14), bronchopulmonary dysplasia (3.7% vs. 8.8%, P=0.49), or mortality (14.5% vs. 13%, P=0.47).
conclusionLISA appears to be a less invasive and more effective alternative to InSurE, demonstrating the ability to reduce the need for intubation and invasive ventilation within the first 72 hours as well as the duration of invasive support in preterm infants with RDS.
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.