Estudo randomizado | Ventilação oscilatória de alta frequência não invasiva vs. pressão positiva contínua nas vias aéreas vs. ventilação com pressão positiva nasal intermitente como suporte pós-extubação para neonatos prematuros.

Noninvasive High-Frequency Oscillatory Ventilation vs Nasal Continuous Positive Airway Pressure vs Nasal Intermittent Positive Pressure Ventilation as Postextubation Support for Preterm Neonates in China: A Randomized Clinical Trial – JAMA Pediatrics (gratuito por tempo limitado)

Comentário no Twitter

In this randomized clinical trial, NHFOV and nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation in neonates provided a small advantage of reduced need for invasive respiratory support when used from extubation and until discharge. https://t.co/qCtNP8Gwj9

— JAMA Pediatrics (@JAMAPediatrics) April 25, 2022

A RCT in @JAMAPediatrics evaluates total duration of mechanical ventilation, need for reintubation, and ventilator-free days after extubation to either NHFOV, NCPAP or NIPPV. https://t.co/krwwMv2Hbr#EBNEOalerts #neoEBM #neotwitter pic.twitter.com/uenwdlZfO4

— Evidence-Based Neo (@EBNEO) April 27, 2022