Advantages and disadvantages of different nasal CPAP systems in newborns

Objective. To compare three different systems of continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP): the naso-pharyngeal tube and two-prong systems in newborns, focusing on duration of CPAP, side effects and cost. Design. Randomized clinical study. Patients. Between July 2000 and September 2001 newborns were randomized to three different CPAP systems. Forty infants in two weight groups (>2500 g and 1250-2500 g; 20 patients in each group) were included. Results. In the group >2500 g the median duration of CPAP was 1.1 days (range 0.25-14.3 days). The median time on a naso-pharyngeal CPAP was 1 day (range 0.25-14.3 days), on Hudson prongs 1.6 days (range 0.5-3.3 days) and on the Infant Flow system 0.7 days (range 0.3-13.6 days; p>0.05 for comparison between groups, Fisher's exact test). With naso-pharyngeal CPAP, 2 patients developed moderate nasal injuries. On Hudson, 2 patients developed moderate and three mild nasal injuries. One patient on the Infant Flow showed mild and one moderate nasal injuries. In the weight group 1250-2500 g the median duration of CPAP was 1.1 days (range 0.1-7.0 days). The median time on the naso-pharyngeal tube was 0.9 days (range 0.1-7 days), on Hudson prongs 1.1 days (range 0.7-6.6 days) and on the Infant Flow system 1.3 days (range 0.25-5.9 days; p>0.05 for comparison between groups, Fisher's exact test). With a naso-pharygeal tube, one infant developed mild and one moderate nasal injuries. On Hudson prongs, two had moderate nasal injuries. On Infant Flow, one newborn showed a severe nasal injury and two mild injuries. None of the patients developed a pneumothorax. Conclusion. The naso-pharyngeal tube is an easy, safe and economical CPAP system usable with every common ventilator. For very low birth weight newborns, a prong system may have advantages.