Arch. Dis. Child

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER


[Advanced]
Archives of Disease in Childhood - Fetal and Neonatal Edition 2006;91:F315-F317; doi:10.1136/adc.2006.100487
Copyright © 2006 BMJ Publishing Group Ltd & Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this link to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in ADC Online
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Add article to my folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Eichenwald, E C
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Eichenwald, E C
Topic Collections
Right arrowRelated Articles

PERSPECTIVE

High frequency oscillatory ventilation

High frequency oscillatory ventilation: is equivalence with conventional mechanical ventilation enough?

E C Eichenwald

Correspondence to:
Correspondence to:
Dr Eichenwald
Baylor College of Medicine, 6621 Fannin, MC: WT6-104, Houston, TX 77030, USA; eichenwa@bcm.edu (after 1 July 2006); eeichenwald@partners.org (before 1 July 2006)

A perspective on the article by Marlow et al (see page 320)

Keywords: high frequency oscillatory ventilation; conventional ventilation; respiratory function

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

Several investigators have reported short term results of trials comparing high frequency ventilation with conventional mechanical ventilation in premature infants with respiratory distress syndrome. However, very few data are available on longer term outcomes in infants randomised to these two very different modes of mechanical ventilation.1,2 In this issue, Marlow et al for the United Kingdom Oscillation Study Group (UKOS) report 2 year respiratory and neurological outcomes for the study cohort in their randomised trial of high frequency oscillatory ventilation (HFOV) compared with conventional mechanical ventilation. Although the prevalence of disability in their study cohort was high, they found no significant differences in neurodevelopmental scores or report of respiratory symptoms at 2 years of age between infants randomised to the two modes of ventilatory support.

The original report of the short term outcomes of their trial, published in 2002, showed no difference in the primary outcome . . . [Full text of this article]


Related Articles

Fantoms
Ben Stenson
Arch. Dis. Child. Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2006 91: F313. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Randomised trial of high frequency oscillatory ventilation or conventional ventilation in babies of gestational age 28 weeks or less: respiratory and neurological outcomes at 2 years
N Marlow, A Greenough, J L Peacock, L Marston, E S Limb, A H Johnson, S A Calvert for the United Kingdom Oscillation Study Group
Arch. Dis. Child. Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2006 91: F320-F326. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER
ARCH DIS CHILD FETAL NEONATAL ED ED PRACTICE
Terms and conditions relating to subscriptions purchased online  ¦  Website terms and conditions  ¦  Privacy policy
Copyright © 2006 BMJ Publishing Group Ltd & Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health