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.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Competing interests None.
Ethics approval James Cook University Hospital Research Ethics Committee.