Cochrane · systematic review · CD005384
Early nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) versus early nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP) for preterm infants
Lemyre, B, Deguise, M-O, Benson, P, et al. · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2023 · Cochrane Library
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
6
current version
GRADE rated
6
No studies
0
Included studies
NR
No studies 0 · 0%Ungraded 0 · 0%Very low 0 · 0%Low 4 · 66.7%Moderate 2 · 33.3%High 0 · 0%
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
Questions and results
Current version onlyNasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) versus nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP) (by population)
Population: )
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Respiratory failure Nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) vs nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP) (by population) | RR 0.65 [0.54, 0.78] | 17 studies · 1958 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias |
Need for endotracheal tube ventilation Nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) vs nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP) (by population) | RR 0.67 [0.56, 0.81] | 16 studies · 1848 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias |
Mortality during study period Nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) vs nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP) (by population) | RR 0.82 [0.62, 1.1] | 17 studies · 1958 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Chronic lung disease Nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) vs nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP) (by population) | RR 0.7 [0.52, 0.92] | 12 studies · 1284 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Pneumothorax Nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) vs nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP) (by population) | RR 0.92 [0.6, 1.41] | 16 studies · 1674 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Severe intraventricular hemorrhage (grade III/IV) Nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) vs nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP) (by population) | RR 0.98 [0.53, 1.79] | 8 studies · 977 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |
NIPPV versus NCPAP (by population)
Population: )
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Respiratory failure NIPPV vs NCPAP (by population) | RR 0.62 [0.47, 0.82] | 9 studies · 876 participants | Moderate |
Need for intubation NIPPV vs NCPAP (by population) | RR 0.79 [0.64, 0.97] | 8 studies · 766 participants | Moderate |
Pneumothorax NIPPV vs NCPAP (by population) | RR 0.69 [0.35, 1.34] | 9 studies · 876 participants | Low |
Severe intraventricular hemorrhage (grade III/IV) NIPPV vs NCPAP (by population) | RR 1.26 [0.53, 3.01] | 4 studies · 430 participants | Very low |
Chronic lung disease NIPPV vs NCPAP (by population) | RR 0.67 [0.47, 0.94] | 8 studies · 727 participants | Moderate |
Mortality during study period NIPPV vs NCPAP (by population) | RR 0.77 [0.51, 1.17] | 9 studies · 876 participants | Low |