摘要
目的评价加温湿化高流量鼻导管通气（HHHFNC）预防新生儿拔管失败的有效性和安全性。方法计算机检索Pub Med、Cochrane Library、外文医学信息资源检索平台（FMRS）、中国期刊网全文数据库,手动检索作为补充,收集比较HHHFNC与经鼻持续气道正压通气（NCPAP）预防新生儿拔管失败的随机对照试验,进行文献筛选和质量评价,采用Rev Man5.3软件进行Meta分析。结果共纳入5项研究1 040名新生儿。Meta分显示,HHHFNC组与NCPAP组预防新生儿拔管失败的治疗失败率比较差异无统计学意义;HHHFNC组与NCPAP组院内病死率、支气管肺发育不良、脑室内出血、坏死性小肠结肠炎、早产儿视网膜病的发生率及全肠道喂养获得时间方面比较差异均无统计学意义;而HHHFNC组鼻损伤（OR=0.49,95%CI：0.34-0.71,P=0.0001）、气漏（OR=0.27,95%CI：0.07-0.97,P=0.04）的发生率则低于NCPAP组,差异有统计学意义。结论 HHHFNC可作为预防新生儿拔管失败的一种安全、有效的临床手段。
Objective To evaluate the efficacy and safety of heated humidified high-flow nasal cannula（HHHFNC） in preventing extubation failure in neonates. Methods A literature search was performed using Pub Med, Cochrane Library, FMRS, and CNKI to collect the randomized controlled trials（RCTs） and quasi-RCTs which compared the clinical efficacy of HHHFNC and nasal continuous positive airway pressure（NCPAP） in preventing extubation failure in neonates. The identified studies were finally selected after full-text search and quality assessment and then subjected to a Meta analysis using Rev Man 5.3. Results Five eligible trials involving 1 040 neonates were included in the Meta analysis. The Meta analysis showed that there was no significant difference in treatment failure rate between the HHHFNC and the NCPAP groups. The HHHFNC group had significantly lower incidence rates of nasal trauma（OR=0.49, 95% CI： 0.34-0.71, P=0.0001） and pneumothorax（OR=0.27, 95% CI： 0.07-0.97, P=0.04） than the NCPAP group, but there were no significant differences in the duration to reach full oral feedings and the incidence rates of serious adverse events or other complications between the two groups, such as in-hospital mortality, bronchopulmonary dysplasia, intraventricular hemorrhage, necrotizing enterocolitis, and retinopathy of prematurity. Conclusions HHHFNC is safe and effective in preventing extubation failure in neonates.
出处
《中国当代儿科杂志》
CAS
CSCD
北大核心
2015年第12期1327-1332,共6页
Chinese Journal of Contemporary Pediatrics
