Nasal intermittent mandatory ventilation versus nasal continuous positive airway pressure for respiratory distress syndrome: a randomized, controlled, prospective study.

Machine translation Machine translation
类别 Primary study
期刊The Journal of pediatrics
Year 2007
連結 Pubmed, DOI

此文章收錄於 3 Systematic reviews Systematic reviews (3 references)

Loading references information
目的：为了评估是否鼻腔间歇指令通气（NIMV）经鼻持续气道正压通气（NCPAP）相比将减少气管通风的要求，在<35周早产儿呼吸窘迫综合征（RDS）的治疗。
研究设计：随机，对照，前瞻性，单中心的研究。四十一婴儿被随机NCPAP和43比较的婴幼儿NIMV（出生体重1533 + / - 603与1616 + / - 494克，胎龄30.6 + / - 3.0和31.1 + / - 2.3周，P = 0.5，分别）。
结果：NIMV和NCPAP治疗的婴儿在研究开始时有类似的心肺状态。在总的队列中，与NIMV治疗的婴儿需要少气管的通风处理使用NCPAP（25％比49％，P <0.05）有类似的趋势在婴儿<1500克的婴儿相比，31％和62％，P =。06当控制体重和胎龄，NIMV是较为成功的，防止气管通气（P <0.05）。与NIMV治疗婴幼儿支气管肺发育不良（BPD）的发生率降低与NCPAP（2％对17％，P <0.05，治疗相比，在总的队列婴儿和5％对33％，P <0.05， <1500克）。
结论：NIMV与NCPAP相比下降了气管通气的早产儿RDS的要求。这是与BPD的发生率降低。
This translation has been produced by an automated software. If you wish to submit your own translation, please send it to translations@epistemonikos.org
Epistemonikos ID: 61d6424f7d43b8fd4a98cca64553a70fce74b972
First added on: Nov 07, 2012
Warning
This is a machine translation from an article in Epistemonikos.

Machine translations cannot be considered reliable in order to make health decisions.

See an official translation in the following languages: English

If you prefer to see the machine translation we assume you accept our terms of use