Post-extubation using high nCPAP: are we ready for the change?
Venkatakrishna Kakkilaya,Charles R. Rosenfeld
DOI: https://doi.org/10.21037/tp-24-318
2024-11-29
Translational Pediatrics
Abstract:Venkatakrishna Kakkilaya , Charles R. Rosenfeld Division of Neonatal-Perinatal Medicine, Department of Pediatrics, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, USA Comment on: Kidman AM, Manley BJ, Boland RA, et al . Higher versus lower nasal continuous positive airway pressure for extubation of extremely preterm infants in Australia (ÉCLAT): a multicentre, randomised, superiority trial. Lancet Child Adolesc Health 2023;7:844-51. Keywords: Mechanical ventilation (MV); extubation failure; neonates Submitted Aug 17, 2024. Accepted for publication Nov 05, 2024. Published online Nov 26, 2024. doi: 10.21037/tp-24-318 Extremely preterm born neonates <28 weeks gestational age (GA) are at increased risk of receiving mechanical ventilation (MV) soon after birth and this risk increases with decreasing GA. The harmful effects of MV on the developing lung have been clearly demonstrated by many investigators, leading to the development of strategies designed to not only limit the duration of postnatal MV, but also improve the transition to noninvasive mechanisms of respiratory support. Nonetheless, extubation failure remains a common issue in this preterm population and continues to be associated with an increased risk of mortality and morbidity (1). Thus, in recent years, the best predictors of extubation success and the optimal method(s) for post-extubation support have been rigorously evaluated. However, there is still no consensus regarding either of these. Nasal continuous positive airway pressure (nCPAP) and noninvasive intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) are the two modalities most often used for post-extubation respiratory support in low GA neonates. In a meta-analysis that included 19 randomized control trials (RCTs) comparing nCPAP and NIPPV, it was suggested that NIPPV may be the superior modality in achieving successful extubation in neonates 28–32 weeks GA; however, the authors noted a paucity of data regarding neonates <28 weeks GA (2). Moreover, the post-extubation nCPAP level was limited to ≤8 cmH 2 O, whereas the mean airway pressure in the NIPPV arm of the studies examined was higher. Despite the routine use of nCPAP as the primary modality for respiratory support at birth or post-extubation, the optimal level of nCPAP for both purposes remain unclear (3). Concerns about the occurrence of pneumothorax with higher levels of nCPAP were raised in a RCT that applied a nCPAP of 8 cmH 2 O at birth. Notably, these investigators also used a high threshold to administer surfactant therapy, i.e., nCPAP of 8 cmH 2 O and FiO 2 ≥0.6 (4). It is well established that early surfactant administration not only mitigates the risk of pneumothorax, but also improves outcomes compared to late rescue surfactant in neonates intubated soon after birth (5). In a recent RCT evaluating early rescue (FiO 2 0.3) with less invasive surfactant administration (LISA) it was observed that the rate of pneumothorax was decreased despite the use of higher levels of nCPAP, i.e., 5–8 cmH 2 O (6). In our experience in a large Neonatal Intensive Care Unit the stepwise escalation of nCPAP (≤8 cmH 2 O) along with timely surfactant administration resulted in a decreased occurrence of pneumothorax (7,8). However, there are limited data regarding the use of nCPAP ≥9 cmH 2 O. Notably, the application of brief periods of elevated nCPAP at 8–13 cmH 2 O in physiologic studies resulted in improved lung volume without increasing the risk of pneumothorax or significant changes in cardiac output compared to what many consider a "standard" levels of 5–6 cmH 2 O in preterm neonates (9,10). To date, the use of higher nCPAP levels, i.e., 7–9 cmH 2 O, for post extubation support has been reported in only one study (11). Therefore, evaluating the benefits of higher levels of nCPAP in neonates extubated after surfactant therapy is important. The report by Kidman et al. (12) is a multicenter study performed in Australia. It begins to fill the knowledge gap regarding the use of higher nCPAP levels for the post-extubation respiratory support of neonates <28 weeks GA. In that study, neonates were extubated from conventional or high-frequency oscillatory ventilation with a pre-extubation mean airway pressure of <10 cmH 2 O. However, extubation criteria and timing of extubation are not defined. The intervention arm utilized nCPAP levels of 9–11 cmH 2 O whereas the control arm used the more conventional nCPAP levels of 6–8 cmH 2 O. Neonates were extubated to an average nCPAP of 10 vs. 7 cmH 2 O, respectively. The primary outcome was extubation failure, defined as the need for reintubation within 7 days after the first attempt to extubate or escalation of support above pre-specified levels. Unfort -Abstract Truncated-
pediatrics