Nasal high-frequency jet ventilation (NHFJV) as a novel means of respiratory support in extremely low birth weight infants

Nasal High-Frequency Oscillatory Ventilation Use in Romanian Neonatal Intensive Care Units-The Results of a Recent Survey

BACKGROUND

Nasal high-frequency oscillatory ventilation (nHFOV) has emerged as an effective initial and rescue noninvasive respiratory support mode for preterm infants with respiratory distress syndrome (RDS); however, little is known about nHFOV use in Romanian neonatal intensive care units (NICUs).

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to identify the usage extent and clinical application of nHFOV in Romania.

METHODS

A structured web-based questionnaire was designed to find the rate of nHFOV use and knowledge of this new method of noninvasive respiratory support in Romanian level III NICUs. Using multiple-choice, open-ended, and yes/no questions, we collected information on the NICU's size, noninvasive respiratory support modes used, nHFOV use, indications, settings, nasal interfaces, secondary effects, and equipment used. Descriptive statistics and comparisons were performed using IBM SPSS Statistics 26.0.

RESULTS

A total of 21/23 (91.3%) leaders from level III NICUs (median [IQR] number of beds of 10 [10-17.5]) responded to the survey. The most frequently used noninvasive ventilation modes were CPAP mode on mechanical ventilators (76.2%), followed by NIPPV (76.2%); heated, humidified high-flow nasal cannula (HHHFNC) (61.9%); and nHFOV (11/21 units; 52.4%). A total of 5/11 units reported frequent nHFOV use (in two or more newborns/month) in both term and preterm infants. The main indications reported for nHFOV use were CPAP failure (90.9%), hypercapnia (81.8%), and bronchopulmonary dysplasia (72.7%). Face/nasal masks and short binasal prongs are the most commonly used nasal interfaces (90.9% and 72.7%, respectively). Air leaks at the interface level (90.9%), thick secretions (81.8%), and airway obstruction (63.6%) were the most frequently mentioned adverse effects of nHFOV. Only three of the NICUs had a written protocol for nHFOV use. Most units not yet using nHFOV cited lack of equipment, experience, training, or insufficient information and evidence for the clinical use and outcome of nHFOV use in neonates as the main reasons for not implementing this noninvasive respiratory mode.

CONCLUSIONS

Our survey showed that nHFOV is already used in more than half of the Romanian level III NICUs to support term and preterm infants with respiratory distress despite a lack of consensus regarding indications and settings during nHFOV.

Non-invasive high-frequency ventilation in newborn infants with respiratory distress

BACKGROUND

Respiratory distress occurs in up to 7% of newborns, with respiratory support (RS) provided invasively via an endotracheal (ET) tube or non-invasively via a nasal interface. Invasive ventilation increases the risk of lung injury and chronic lung disease (CLD). Using non-invasive strategies, with or without minimally invasive surfactant, may reduce the need for mechanical ventilation and the risk of lung damage in newborn infants with respiratory distress.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of nasal high-frequency ventilation (nHFV) compared to invasive ventilation via an ET tube or other non-invasive ventilation methods on morbidity and mortality in preterm and term infants with or at risk of respiratory distress.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and three trial registries in April 2023.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cluster- or quasi-RCTs of nHFV in newborn infants with respiratory distress compared to invasive or non-invasive ventilation.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently selected the trials for inclusion, extracted data, assessed the risk of bias, and undertook GRADE assessment.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 33 studies, mostly in low- to middle-income settings, that investigated this therapy in 5068 preterm and 46 term infants. nHFV compared to invasive respiratory therapy for initial RS We are very uncertain whether nHFV reduces mortality before hospital discharge (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.20 to 2.18; 1 study, 80 infants) or the incidence of CLD (RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.09 to 1.59; 2 studies, 180 infants), both very low-certainty. ET intubation, death or CLD, severe intraventricular haemorrhage (IVH) and neurodevelopmental disability (ND) were not reported. nHFV vs nasal continuous positive airway pressure (nCPAP) used for initial RS We are very uncertain whether nHFV reduces mortality before hospital discharge (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.41 to 2.41; 4 studies, 531 infants; very low-certainty). nHFV may reduce ET intubation (RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.82; 5 studies, 571 infants), but there may be little or no difference in CLD (RR 1.35, 95% CI 0.80 to 2.27; 4 studies, 481 infants); death or CLD (RR 2.50, 95% CI 0.52 to 12.01; 1 study, 68 participants); or severe IVH (RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.36 to 3.78; 4 studies, 531 infants), all low-certainty evidence. ND was not reported. nHFV vs nasal intermittent positive-pressure ventilation (nIPPV) used for initial RS nHFV may result in little to no difference in mortality before hospital discharge (RR 1.86, 95% CI 0.90 to 3.83; 2 studies, 84 infants; low-certainty). nHFV may have little or no effect in reducing ET intubation (RR 1.33, 95% CI 0.76 to 2.34; 5 studies, 228 infants; low-certainty). There may be a reduction in CLD (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.95; 5 studies, 307 infants; low-certainty). A single study (36 infants) reported no events for severe IVH. Death or CLD and ND were not reported. nHFV vs high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) used for initial RS We are very uncertain whether nHFV reduces ET intubation (RR 2.94, 95% CI 0.65 to 13.27; 1 study, 37 infants) or reduces CLD (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.46 to 2.98; 1 study, 37 participants), both very low-certainty. There were no mortality events before hospital discharge or severe IVH. Other deaths, CLD and ND, were not reported. nHFV vs nCPAP used for RS following planned extubation nHFV probably results in little or no difference in mortality before hospital discharge (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.64; 6 studies, 1472 infants; moderate-certainty). nHFV may result in a reduction in ET reintubation (RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.51; 11 studies, 1897 infants) and CLD (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.91; 10 studies, 1829 infants), both low-certainty. nHFV probably has little or no effect on death or CLD (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.06; 2 studies, 966 infants) and severe IVH (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.13; 3 studies, 1117 infants), both moderate-certainty. We are very uncertain whether nHFV reduces ND (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.37 to 2.29; 1 study, 74 infants; very low-certainty). nHFV versus nIPPV used for RS following planned extubation nHFV may have little or no effect on mortality before hospital discharge (RR 1.83, 95% CI 0.70 to 4.79; 2 studies, 984 infants; low-certainty). There is probably a reduction in ET reintubation (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.89; 6 studies, 1364 infants), but little or no effect on CLD (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.04; 4 studies, 1236 infants); death or CLD (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.08; 3 studies, 1070 infants); or severe IVH (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.10; 4 studies, 1162 infants), all moderate-certainty. One study reported there might be no difference in ND (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.35 to 2.16; 1 study, 72 infants; low-certainty). nHFV versus nIPPV following initial non-invasive RS failure nHFV may have little or no effect on mortality before hospital discharge (RR 1.44, 95% CI 0.10 to 21.33); or ET intubation (RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.51 to 2.98); or CLD (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.47); or severe IVH (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.02 to 10.87); 1 study, 39 participants, all low- or very low-certainty. Other deaths or CLD and ND were not reported.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

For initial RS, we are very uncertain if using nHFV compared to invasive respiratory therapy affects clinical outcomes. However, nHFV may reduce intubation when compared to nCPAP. For planned extubation, nHFV may reduce the risk of reintubation compared to nCPAP and nIPPV. nHFV may reduce the risk of CLD when compared to nCPAP. Following initial non-invasive respiratory support failure, nHFV when compared to nIPPV may result in little to no difference in intubation. Large trials, particularly in high-income settings, are needed to determine the role of nHFV in initial RS and following the failure of other non-invasive respiratory support. Also, the optimal settings of nHVF require further investigation.

Noninvasive Ventilation

Systematic Reviews and Randomized clinical trials have shown that the use of noninvasive ventilation (NIV) compared to invasive mechanical ventilation reduces the risk of bronchopulmonary dysplasia and or mortality. Most commonly used NIV modes include nasal continuous positive airway pressure, bi-phasic modes, such as, bi-level positive airway pressure, nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation, high flow nasal cannula, noninvasive neurally adjusted ventilatory assist, and nasal high frequency ventilation are discussed in this review.

Invasive and non-invasive ventilatory strategies for early and evolving bronchopulmonary dysplasia

In the age of surfactant and antenatal steroids, neonatal care has improved outcomes of preterm infants dramatically. Since the early 2000's neonatologists have strived to decrease bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD) by decreasing ventilator-associated lung injury and utilizing many novel modes of non-invasive respiratory support. After the initial success with nasal continuous positive airway pressure, it was established that discontinuing invasive ventilation early in favor of non-invasive respiratory support is the most effective way to reduce the incidence of BPD. In this review, we discuss the management of the preterm lung from the time of delivery, through the phases of respiratory distress syndrome (early BPD) and then evolving BPD. The goal remains to optimize respiratory support of the preterm lung while minimizing ventilator-associated lung injury and oxygen toxicity. A multidisciplinary approach involving the medical team and family is quintessential in reaching this goal and involves adequate respiratory support, optimizing nutrition and fluid balance as well as preventing infections.

State of the art on neonatal noninvasive respiratory support: How physiological and technological principles explain the clinical outcomes

Noninvasive respiratory support has gained significant popularity in neonatal units because of its potential to reduce lung injury associated with invasive mechanical ventilation. To minimize lung injury, clinicians aim to apply for noninvasive respiratory support as early as possible. However, the physiological background and the technology behind such support modes are not always clear, and many open questions remain regarding the indications of use and clinical outcomes. This narrative review discusses the currently available evidence for various noninvasive respiratory support modes applied in Neonatal Medicine in terms of physiological effects and indications. Reviewed modes include nasal continuous positive airway pressure, nasal high-flow therapy, noninvasive high-frequency oscillatory ventilation, nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV), synchronized NIPPV and noninvasive neurally adjusted ventilatory assist. To enhance clinicians' awareness of each support mode's strengths and limitations, we summarize technical features related to the functioning mechanisms of devices and the physical properties of the interfaces commonly used for providing noninvasive respiratory support to neonates. We finally address areas of current controversy and suggest possible areas of research for implementing noninvasive respiratory support in neonatal intensive care units.

Novel Ventilation Strategies to Reduce Adverse Pulmonary Outcomes

Extremely preterm infants who must suddenly support their own gas exchange with lungs that are incompletely developed and lacking adequate amount of surfactant and antioxidant defenses are susceptible to lung injury. The decades-long quest to prevent bronchopulmonary dysplasia has had limited success, in part because of increasing survival of more immature infants. The process must begin in the delivery room with gentle assistance in establishing and maintaining adequate lung aeration, followed by noninvasive support and less invasive surfactant administration. Various modalities of invasive and noninvasive support have been used with varying degree of effect and are reviewed in this article.