Nasal bi-level positive airway pressure (BiPAP) versus nasal continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) in preterm infants ≤32 weeks: A retrospective cohort study

Aim To investigate whether Bi‐level positive airway pressure (BiPAP), compared with nasal continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP), is a more effective therapeutic strategy in preterm infants ≤32 weeks. Methods All inborn infants between 26+1 and 32+6 weeks' gestation, admitted to the neonata...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of paediatrics and child health 2016-05, Vol.52 (5), p.493-498
Main Authors: Rong, Zhi-Hui, Li, Wen-Bin, Liu, Wei, Cai, Bao-Huan, Wang, Jing, Yang, Min, Li, Wei, Chang, Li-Wen
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
bi-level nasal positive airway pressure
bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD)
Continuous Positive Airway Pressure - methods
Gestational Age
Humans
Infant
Infant, Newborn
Infant, Premature
Intensive Care Units, Neonatal
nasal continuous positive airway pressure
Nose
preterm infants
Respiratory Distress Syndrome, Newborn
Retrospective Studies
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Aim To investigate whether Bi‐level positive airway pressure (BiPAP), compared with nasal continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP), is a more effective therapeutic strategy in preterm infants ≤32 weeks. Methods All inborn infants between 26+1 and 32+6 weeks' gestation, admitted to the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU ) of Tongji Medical Hospital between 1 January, 2010 and 31 December, 2011 (the 2010–2011 cohort or CPAP cohort) and between 1 January, 2012 and 31 December, 2013 (the 2012–2013 cohort or BiPAP cohort), were retrospectively identified. The primary outcome was intubation in infants 
ISSN:1034-4810
1440-1754
DOI:10.1111/jpc.13175