Clinical analysis of intermittent and continuous nasal positive airway pressure treatment on recurrent apnea in preterm children

Abstract

Objective To compare nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation （NIPPV） with nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP) treatment of primary apenea of premature (AOP) effect,and provide a scientific basis for the AOP treatment.Methods Seventy-six cases of children with AOP were randomly divided into NIPPV group (40 cases) and NCPAP group (36 cases).Comparison of two groups changes of blood gas,curative effect,after treatment for invasive mechanical ventilation ratio,ventilation time,and so on.Results Blood gas analysis of two groups before treatment had no significant difference (P ＞ 0.05),1,12 h after treatment of blood gas analysis was statistically significant (P ＜ 0.05).The cure rate,effective rate and inefficiency in NIPPV group were significantly better than those in NCPAP group [82.5％ (33/40)vs.61.1％ (22/36),92.5％ (37/40) vs.80.6％ (29/36),7.5％ (3/40) vs.19.4％ (7/36)].Assisted ventilation time was significantly shorter in NCPAP group[(39.45 ± 6.99) h vs.(69.39 ± 20.51) h].The difference was statistically significant (P ＜ 0.05).Two groups of intraventricular hemorrhage,bronchial pulmonary hypoplasia,neonatal necrotizing enterocolitis incidence rate had no significant difference (P ＞0.05).In NIPPV group the incidence rate of premature infant retina disease and cererbral white matter softening around the ventricle was significantly lower than that in NCPAP group [2.5％ (1/40) vs.13.9％(5/36),2.5％(1/40) vs.11.1％(4/36)].The difference was statistically significant (P ＜ 0.05).Conclusion NIPPV in the treatment of recurrent apnea in premature infants curative effect and prognosis is better than NCPAP. Key words: Premature birth; Apnea; Nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilationt; Nasal continuous positive airway pressure; Clinical analysis