Non‐invasive neurally adjusted ventilatory assist (NIV‐NAVA) reduces extubation failures in preterm neonates—A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Abstract

AbstractAimTo analyse the evidence of non‐invasive neurally adjusted ventilatory assist (NIV‐NAVA) in preterm neonates compared to nasal continuous positive airway pressure (nCPAP) or nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV).MethodsWe performed a systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomised controlled trials and included studies where NIV‐NAVA was analysed in preterm (<37 gestational weeks) born neonates. Our main outcomes were the need for endotracheal intubation, the need for surfactant therapy, and reintubation rates. Risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated.ResultsA total of five studies were included. The endotracheal intubation rate was 25% in the NIV‐NAVA group and 26% in the nCPAP group (RR 0.91, CI: 0.56–1.48). The respective rates for surfactant therapy were 30% and 35% (RR 0.85, CI: 0.56–1.29). The reintubation rate in neonates previously invasively ventilated was 8% in the NIV‐NAVA group and 29% in the nCPAP/NIPPV group (RR 0.29, 95%CI: 0.10–0.81). Evidence certainty was rated as low for all outcomes.ConclusionsNIV‐NAVA as the primary respiratory support did not reduce the need for endotracheal intubation or surfactant therapy. NIV‐NAVA seemed to reduce the reintubation rate after extubation in pre‐term neonates.