Register for email alerts and news feeds:
This journal | BMJ Group
rss
Published Online First: 25 March 2009. doi:10.1136/adc.2008.150938
Archives of Disease in Childhood - Fetal and Neonatal Edition 2009;94:F360-F362
Copyright © 2009 BMJ Publishing Group Ltd & Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health.

ORIGINAL ARTICLES

Long term follow-up of very low birthweight infants from a neonatal volume versus pressure mechanical ventilation trial

J Singh1, S K Sinha1, E Alsop1, S Gupta1, A Mishra2, S M Donn3

1 Department of Neonatology, James Cook University Hospital, Middlesbrough, UK
2 Department of Neonatology, Hope Hospital, Manchester, UK
3 Division of Neonatal Perinatal Medicine, C.S. Mott Children’s Hospital University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA

Correspondence to Professor Sunil K Sinha, Department of Paediatrics and Neonatal Medicine, University of Durham and James Cook University Hospital, Marton Road, Middlesbrough TS4 3BW, UK; sunil.sinha{at}stees.nhs.uk

Background: A previous randomised trial showed volume controlled ventilation (VCV) was efficacious in ventilating very preterm and extremely low birthweight babies.

Objective: To compare long term survival, pulmonary morbidities and gross neurodevelopmental outcomes of babies randomised to either VCV or pressure limited ventilation (PLV) for treatment of respiratory distress syndrome.

Design/Methods: Masked evaluation of health status, including frequency of respiratory illness, use of medications, hospital admissions, and gross neurodevelopmental status were obtained using a structured parental questionnaire and verification from medical records.

Results: 94 of 109 children (86%) survived to discharge. Three died after discharge (2 VCV, 1 PLV). Modality of ventilation did not affect overall mortality; seven VCV children died (12%) versus 11 PLV (21%) (OR 0.5 (95% CI 0.1 to 1.4), p = 0.13). Respiratory abnormalities were present in 32 (37%), and 26 (30%) required hospital readmission. There was no significant difference in readmission rates between the two groups: VC 13/45 (29%) and PLV 19/40 (47%) (OR 0.4 (0.1 to 1.1), p = 0.07). Modality of ventilation did not affect frequency of respiratory illness: VC 12 (27%) and PLV 14 (35%) (OR 0.46 (0.1 to 1.1), p = 0.09). However, significantly fewer VCV children (13%, n = 6) compared to PLV children (32%, n = 13) required treatment with inhaled steroids/bronchodilators (OR 0.3 (0.1 to 0.9), p = 0.04). Nine children had severe neurodevelopmental disability (cerebral palsy, blindness, deafness) (9.8%; 3 VCV, 6 PLV 6) (OR 0.4 (0.09 to 1.7)).

Conclusions: The efficacy of VCV in very preterm and low birth babies appears to be maintained on longer term evaluation.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?

This Article

Services
Google Scholar
PubMed
Topic Collections
Bookmark with

Register for free content

The full back archive is now available for all BMJ Journals. Institutional subscribers may access the entire archive as part of their subscription. Personal subscribers will also have access to all content when logged in. Non-subscribers who register have free access to all articles published before 2006 right back to volume 1 issue 1. Register here to access the free archive of all BMJ Journals.

Don't forget to sign up for content alerts so you keep up to date with all the articles as they are published.

Latest from ADC

 

ADC is co-owned by the RCPCH and is the official journal of the European Academy of Paediatrics

BMJ Careers - Latest Paediatrics and Paediatric Surgery Jobs

Paediatrics and Paediatric Surgery Jobs