Prophylactic nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) versus prophylactic nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP) for preterm infants

  • Protocol
  • Intervention

Authors

  • Matthew Laughon,

    Corresponding author
    1. The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Department of Pediatrics, Division of Neonatology, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA
    • Matthew Laughon, Department of Pediatrics, Division of Neonatology, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, CB# 7596, 4th Floor, UNC Hospitals, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, 27599, USA. matt_laughon@med.unc.edu.

    Search for more papers by this author
  • Carl Bose

    1. The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Department of Pediatrics, Division of Neonatal-Perinatal Medicine, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA
    Search for more papers by this author

Abstract

This is the protocol for a review and there is no abstract. The objectives are as follows:

The objective of this review is to determine whether prophylactic (applied within two hours of birth) NIPPV versus NCPAP in newly born preterm infants less than 37 weeks gestation reduces the incidence of mortality at 28 days or chronic lung disease (oxygen therapy at 36 weeks post-menstrual age). Secondary outcomes include mortality before hospital discharge, mechanical ventilation (IPPV through an endotracheal tube), duration of mechanical ventilation, use of surfactant, pneumothorax, duration of oxygen dependence, intraventricular hemorrhage (all grades), severe intraventricular hemorrhage (grades III/IV), intestinal perforation, necrotizing enterocolitis (Bell's stage 2 two or greater), duration of hospital stay, retinopathy of prematurity, sepsis, and nasal septal injury. Subgroup analyses will be performed by gestational age (< 28 weeks vs. ≥ 28 weeks), birth weight (<1000 grams vs. ≥1000 grams), and synchronized versus unsynchronized NIPPV.