Prophylactic nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) versus prophylactic nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP) for preterm infants
Editorial Group: Cochrane Neonatal Group
Published Online: 20 JUL 2005
Assessed as up-to-date: 4 APR 2005
Copyright © 2009 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
How to Cite
Laughon M, Bose C. Prophylactic nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) versus prophylactic nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP) for preterm infants (Protocol). Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2005, Issue 3. Art. No.: CD005384. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD005384.
- Publication Status: Edited (no change to conclusions)
- Published Online: 20 JUL 2005
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.