OBJECTIVETo compare the clinical efficacy of nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) and heated humidified high flow nasal cannula (HHHFNC) in the treatment of respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) among very low birth weight (VLBW) preterm infants.

METHODSA total of 89 very low birth weight premature infants with respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) who were randomly administered with NIPPV (n=46) and HHHFNC (n=43) as an initial respiratory support. The incidence of initial treatment failure, the usage of pulmonary surfactant (PS), the parameters of respiratory support treatment and the incidence of complications were compared between the two groups.

RESULTSThere were no significant differences between the NIPPV and HHHFNC groups in the following items: the rate of intubation within 72 hours, rate of PS use, duration of invasive or non-invasive mechanical ventilation, duration of oxygen therapy, and incidence rates of severe apnea and pneumonia (P>0.05). There were also no significant differences in the incidence rates of bronchopulmonary dysplasia, necrotizing enterocolitis, retinopathy of prematurity, patent ductus arteriosus, intracranial hemorrhage, and air leak between the two group (P>0.05). The incidence rate of nose injury in the NIPPV group was higher than that in the HHHFNC group (P<0.05).

CONCLUSIONSAs an initial respiratory support for very low birth weight preterm infants with RDS, HHHFNC has a similar clinical effect as NIPPV, suggesting that HHHFNC is a safe and effective clinical option as a non-invasive ventilation treatment.