Responses

International randomised controlled trial of patient triggered ventilation in neonatal respiratory distress syndrome
Free
Compose Response

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g. higgs-boson@gmail.com
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Statement of Competing Interests

PLEASE NOTE:

  • A rapid response is a moderated but not peer reviewed online response to a published article in a BMJ journal; it will not receive a DOI and will not be indexed unless it is also republished as a Letter, Correspondence or as other content. Find out more about rapid responses.
  • We intend to post all responses which are approved by the Editor, within 14 days (BMJ Journals) or 24 hours (The BMJ), however timeframes cannot be guaranteed. Responses must comply with our requirements and should contribute substantially to the topic, but it is at our absolute discretion whether we publish a response, and we reserve the right to edit or remove responses before and after publication and also republish some or all in other BMJ publications, including third party local editions in other countries and languages
  • Our requirements are stated in our rapid response terms and conditions and must be read. These include ensuring that: i) you do not include any illustrative content including tables and graphs, ii) you do not include any information that includes specifics about any patients,iii) you do not include any original data, unless it has already been published in a peer reviewed journal and you have included a reference, iv) your response is lawful, not defamatory, original and accurate, v) you declare any competing interests, vi) you understand that your name and other personal details set out in our rapid response terms and conditions will be published with any responses we publish and vii) you understand that once a response is published, we may continue to publish your response and/or edit or remove it in the future.
  • By submitting this rapid response you are agreeing to our terms and conditions for rapid responses and understand that your personal data will be processed in accordance with those terms and our privacy notice.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Vertical Tabs

Other responses

Jump to comment:

  • Published on:
    Re: 'PTV': should it be patient triggered and patient terminated ventilation?

    Dear Editor

    Visveshwara's eLetter[1] emphasises that the results of the trigger trial should not be interpreted as demonstrating lack of benefit for patient triggered ventilation using other sensors or ventilators. I would concur with this statement, which was emphasised in the paper.

    However, Visveshwara should not be surprised to find different outcome rates in the patients whose results he presents,...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.
  • Published on:
    To trigger or not to trigger?
    • M Yadav, Senior Registrar Paediatrics
    Dear Editor

    International randomised controlled trial by Dr Baumer[1] concluded that there was no benefit of patient triggered ventilation (PTV), but an added risk of increased pneumothorax in those less than 28 weeks gestation. In the same issue Beresford et al[2] concluded in a similar trial (with slightly more mature newborns 29 weeks vs 27), that PTV was feasible with no significant differences noted in medium term outcom...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.
  • Published on:
    'PTV': should it be patient triggered and patient terminated ventilation?
    Dear Editor

    We were surprised at the results of the two studies published in your journal by Baumer[1] and Bersford et al[2]. Our experience with triggered ventilation over 10 years is shown in the table below:

    Complications of prematurity 1991-99

    ...
    1991
    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.
  • Published on:
    Re: Triggered ventilation in neonates
    Dear Editor

    The interest displayed in the trigger ventilation trial by Burmester and Petros is welcome.(1) Their letter raises questions about the interpretation of the performance of the Dr�ger babylog 8000, which was used in a minority of infants in the study.

    The trigger sensor device is different, and I agree with their implied statement that as each trigger ventilator performs differently results obtained...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.
  • Published on:
    Triggered ventilation in neonates
    • Margarita Burmester, Specialist registrar, Consultant intensivist
    • Other Contributors:
      • Andy Petros

    Editor,

    Baumer reports the results of large multi-centre study comparing the effects of patient triggered ventilation (PTV) with conventional ventilation (IMV)1. There appears to be no benefit from PTV compared to IMV in death rate, development of chronic lung disease, pneumothorax rates and cerebral ultrasound abnormality. In addition, because of an increased trend toward a higher pneumothorax rate, Baumer conc...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.