Background: Nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP) is being widely used for the treatment of respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) in preterm infants. However, there are only a few studies which compare different interfaces of NCPAP delivery and their effects on respiratory outcomes. Objective: We aimed to determine whether NCPAP applied with binasal prongs compared to that with a nasal mask (NM) reduces the rate of moderate/severe bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD) in preterm infants. Methods: Infants between 26 and 32 weeks' gestation who suffered from RDS and were treated with NCPAP were assessed. Parallel randomization was performed to eligible infants to receive NCPAP either via binasal prongs or NM. Infants were intubated if they fulfilled the predefined failure criteria. Data were collected by using the intention-to-treat principle. Results: One hundred and sixty infants were screened and 149 were randomized. Seventy-five infants in the binasal prong (NP) group and 74 in the NM group were analyzed. Mean gestational ages were 29.3 ± 1.6 vs. 29.1 ± 2.0 weeks (p = 0.55), and birth weights were 1,225 ± 257 vs. 1,282 ± 312 g (p = 0.22) in the NP and NM groups, respectively. The frequency of NCPAP failure within 24 h of life was higher in the NP than the NM group (8 vs. 0%; p = 0.09). The median duration of NCPAP was significantly higher in the NP group [median 4 (1-5) vs. 2 (1-3) h, p < 0.01]. The rate of moderate and severe BPD was significantly lower in the NM (n = 2, 2.7%) when compared with the NP group (n = 11, 14.6%; p < 0.01). The BPD/death rates were not different between the 2 groups (NM group: n = 18 or 24.3%; NP group: n = 19 or 25.3%; p = 0.51). Conclusions: The NM was successfully used for delivering NCPAP in preterm infants, and no NCPAP failure was observed within the first 24 h. These data show that applying NCPAP by NM yielded a shorter duration of NCPAP and statistically reduced the rates of moderate and severe BPD.

Keywords:
Respiratory distress syndrome, Bronchopulmonary dysplasia, Nasal continuous positive airway pressure
1.
Bohlin K, Jonsson B, Gustafsson AS, Blennow M: Continuous positive airway pressure and surfactant. Neonatology 2008;93:309-315.
2.
Abdel-Hady H, Nasef N: Respiratory management of the preterm newborn in the delivery room. Res Rep Neonatol 2012;2:39-53.
3.
Sweet DG, Carnielli V, Greisen G, et al: European consensus guidelines on the management of neonatal respiratory distress syndrome in preterm infants - 2010 update. Neonatology 2010;97:402-417.
4.
Sandri F, Plavka R, Simeoni U, et al: The CURPAP study: an international randomized controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy of combining prophylactic surfactant and early nasal continuous positive airway pressure in very preterm infants. Neonatology 2008;94:60-62.
5.
SUPPORT Study Group of the Eunice Kennedy Shriver NICHD Neonatal Research Network; Finer NN, Carlo WA, Walsh MC, Rich W,Gantz MG, Laptook AR, et al: Early CPAP versus surfactant in extremely preterm infants. Engl J Med 2010;362:1970.
6.
Morley CJ, Davis PG, Doyle LW, Brion LP, Hascoet JM, Carlin JB; COIN Trial Investigators: Nasal CPAP or intubation at birth for very preterm infants. N Engl J Med 2008;358:700.
7.
Dunn MS, Kaempf J, de Klerk A, de Klerk R, Reilly M, Howard D: Randomized trial comparing approaches to the initial respiratory management of preterm neonates. Pediatrics 2011;128:e1069.
8.
Sandri F, Ancora G, Lanzoni A, Tagliabue P, Colnaghi M, Ventura ML: Prophylactic nasal continuous positive airways pressure in newborns of 28-31 weeks gestation: multicentre randomized controlled clinical trial. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed 2004;89:F394-F398.
9.
Tapia JL, Urzua S, Bancalari A, Meritano J, Torres G, Fabres J, et al: Randomized trial of early bubble continuous positive airway pressure for very low birth weight infants. J Pediatr 2012;161:75-80.
10.
Roberts CT, Davis PG, Owen LS, et al: Neonatal non-invasive respiratory support: synchronized NIPPV, non-synchronized NIPPV or bi-level CPAP: what is the evidence in 2013? Neonatology 2013;104:203-209.
11.
Kieran EA, Twomey AR, Molloy EJ, Murphy JF, O'Donnell CP: Randomized trial of prongs or mask for nasal continuous positive airway. Pediatrics 2012;130:1170-1176.
12.
De Paoli AG, Davis PG, Faber B, Morley CJ: Devices and pressure sources for administration of nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP) in preterm neonates. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2008;23:CD002977.
13.
Kavvadia V, Greenough A, Dimitriou G: Effect on lung function of continuous positive airway pressure administered either by Infant Flow Driver or a single nasal prong. Eur J Pediatr 2000;159:289-292.
14.
Kattwinkel J, Fleming D, Cha CC, Fanaroff AA, Klaus MH: A device for administration of continuous positive airway pressure by the nasal route. Pediatrics 1973;52:131-134.
15.
Yong SC, Chen, S. J, Boo NY: Incidence of nasal trauma associated with nasal prong versus nasal mask during continuous positive airway pressure treatment in very low birth weight infants: a randomized control study. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed 2005;90:F480-F483.
16.
Buettiker V, Hug MI, Baenziger O, Meyer C, Frey B: Advantages and disadvantages of different nasal CPAP systems in newborns. Intensive Care Med 2004;30:926-930.
17.
Kanmaz HG, Erdeve O, Canpolat FE, Mutlu B, Dilmen U: Randomized controlled trial. Surfactant administration via thin catheter during spontaneous breathing. Pediatrics 2013;131:e502.
18.
Ehrenkranz RA, Walsh MC, Vohr BR, Jobe AH, Wright LL, Fanaroff AA: National Institutes of Child Health and Human Development Neonatal Research Network. Validation of the National Institutes of Health consensus definition of bronchopulmonary dysplasia. Pediatrics 2005;116:1353-1360.
19.
Walsh MC, Wilson-Costello D, Zadell A, Newman N, Fanaroff A: Safety, reliability, and validity of a physiologic definition of bronchopulmonary dysplasia. J Perinatol 2003;23:451-456.
20.
Bell MJ, Ternberg JL, Feigin RD, Keating JP, Marshall R, Barton L, Brotherton T: Neonatal necrotizing enterocolitis. Therapeutic decisions based upon clinical staging. Ann Surg1978;187:1-7.
21.
Papille LA, Burstein J, Burstein R, Koffler H: Incidence and evolution of subependymal and intraventricular hemorrhage: a study of infants with birth weights less than 1500 g. J Pediatr 1978;92:529-534.
22.
International Committee for the Classification of Retinopathy of Prematurity: The international classification of retinopathy of prematurity revisited. Arch Ophthalmol 2005;123:991-999.
23.
Landers MB 3rd, Toth CA, Semple HC, Morse LS: Treatment of retinopathy of prematurity with argon laser photocoagulation. Arch Ophthalmol 1992;110:44-47.
24.
Lyer NP, Mhanna MJ: The role of surfactant and non-invasive mechanical ventilation in early management of respiratory distress syndrome in premature infants. World J Pediatr 2014;10:204-210.
25.
Mazzella M, Bellini C, Calevo MG, Campone F, Massocco D, Mezzano P, et al: A randomized control study comparing the Infant Flow Driver with nasal continuous positive airway pressure in preterm infants. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed 2001;85:F86-F90.
26.
Fischer C, Bertelle V, Hohlfeld J, Forcada-Guex M, Stadelmann-Diaw C, Tolsa JF: Nasal trauma due to continuous positive airway pressure in neonates. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed 2010;95:F447-F451.
27.
Rego MA, Martinez FE: Comparison of two nasal prongs for application of continuous positive airway pressure in neonates. Pediatr Crit Care Med 2002;3:239-243.
© 2016 S. Karger AG, Basel
2016
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.