Comparison of porcine versus bovine surfactant in preterm respiratory distress syndrome: Evidence from real‐world data. A multicentre collaboration from Karnataka

Abstract

AbstractBackground & ObjectivesPorcine surfactant (200 mg/kg initial dose) seems to be superior to bovine surfactants (100 mg/kg) in respiratory distress syndrome (RDS). There is limited data on the choice of surfactant from the developing world. Logically, using higher doses of porcine surfactant comes with an additional cost burden. We decided to evaluate the clinical effects of different types of surfactants.MethodsA retrospective analysis was conducted from August 2019 to December 2022 in six tertiary centers. Neonates 24–34 weeks of gestation with RDS requiring either porcine (200 mg/kg) or bovine surfactant (100 mg/kg) were enrolled. The proportion of BPD, redosing, and other morbidities in either group were analyzed. The outcomes in preterm ≥28 and <28 weeks subgroups were analyzed.ResultsOf 1149 eligible babies, 302 (26%) received surfactant after stabilization with CPAP. One hundred fifty‐eight received porcine, and 144 received bovine surfactant. There was a higher BPD in porcine compared to the bovine group on univariate analysis [24 (15%) vs. 6 (4%); OR: 4; 95% CI: 1.6–10; p = 0.002]. On logistic regression, the gestational age and PDA requiring treatment were independent predictors of BPD, and the type of surfactant and centres did not influence BPD. Redosing [27 (17%) vs. 18 (12%), OR: 1.4; 95% CI: 0.7–2.7; p = 0.2] was not different between both surfactant types. Other morbidities like mortality, air leaks, invasive ventilation, and CPAP duration were also not different between the groups.ConclusionWe could not find a difference in the outcomes of BPD and redosing using porcine surfactant at 200 mg/kg compared to bovine surfactant. Considering the cost burden in the developing world, efficacy needs to be evaluated in randomized clinical trials.