A comparison of invasive and noninvasive ventilation in children less than 1 year of age: A long‐term follow‐up study

Abstract

Based on this long-term follow-up study, NiPPV use in infants appears to be a viable long-term ventilation strategy.

Characteristics and outcomes in children on long-term mechanical ventilation: the experience of a pediatric tertiary center in Rome

“…Their main reasons for initiating LTV were lower respiratory airways diseases (55% on NIV; 10% on IMV), and spinal cord injury (50% on IMV). Our results are similar to those of many studies performed especially in western, more developed and with high-income countries [8][9][10][11][12][13][14][16][17][18][19][20]. Differences between studies may vary depending on several factors such as the availability of local facilities and skills; differences of inclusion criteria in the main diagnostic categories considered, and collaborations with referral.…”

“…In our logistic regression, IMV was likely associated with younger age at starting ventilatory support (p = 0.0220) and receiving [12,14,17]. Only Kherani et al [13], reported no differences comparing the age of initiation of ventilation in the NIV and IMV groups in children less than 1 year. Racca et al [17], reported that IMV was significantly related to younger age, longer time spent under mechanical ventilation, and neuromuscular disorders or hypoxic (ischemic) encephalopathy.…”

“…In previous studies, the reported main reasons for LTV were respiratory tract diseases (18 to 60%), NMDs (15 to 56%), CNS diseases (12 to 46%), and congenital and/or acquired abnormal ventilator control diseases (12 to 25%). Main reasons for IMV were congenital anomalies (43%) [11], CNS diseases (22.5 to 50%) [11][12][13], abnormal ventilator control diseases (52%) [14]. Main reasons for NIV were NMDs (31 to 73%) [11,14] and respiratory disorders (36%) [12].…”

“…Previous studies reported a deaths rate on NIV ranging from 2.6 to 17.7% [10,14], and on IMV from 0 to 40% [14,15]. Deaths have been reported in hospital [10]; because of progression of the underlying disease [10], especially in children with NMDs [8,13,16]; in children affected by cardiac, neurologic [8,11,18], and chronic lung diseases [15,16]. Furthermore, deaths have been reported as consequences of accidental disconnection from the ventilator [10,15] or decannulation [12].…”

A multi‐institutional analysis of children on long‐term non‐invasive respiratory support and their outcomes

“…Over the last decade, the use of long‐term, non‐invasive respiratory support has increased in children with chronic respiratory failure, likely due to its increased acceptance for certain populations, such as those with neurologic and neuromuscular conditions, as well as the increased availability of portable, high‐efficiency positive pressure devices and non‐invasive interfaces. Single‐site studies suggest that over 75% of children are initiated on non‐invasive respiratory support in the inpatient setting, often non‐electively . Despite the increased use of non‐invasive respiratory support, some patients with severe or progressive conditions ultimately cannot be supported without transtracheal ventilation.…”