Skip to main content
. 2020 May 28;8:270. doi: 10.3389/fped.2020.00270

Table 1.

Studies comparing NCPAP and intubation with IMV.

References Intervention (n) GA, weeks BPD (%) Death (%) Combined BPD and death (%) Intubation rates in NCPAP group (%)
Morley et al. (39) NCPAP (307) vs. IMV (303) 25–28 29 vs. 35 6.5 vs. 5.9 34 vs. 39 59
SUPPORT et al. (40) NCPAP (663) vs. IMV (653) 24–28 40 vs. 44 14 vs. 17 49 vs. 54 83
Dunn et al. (41) NCPAP (223) vs. INSURE (216) vs. IMV (209) 26–29 n/a 4 vs. 7 vs 7 30 vs. 28 vs. 36 52
Rojas et al. (42) NCPAP (137) vs. INSURE (141) 27–30 59 vs. 49 9 vs. 9 62 vs. 54 53
Sandri et al. (43) NCPAP (105) vs. INSURE (103) 25–29 n/a n/a 21 vs. 22 31
Göpel et al. (44) NCPAP ± LISA (108) vs. nCPAP ± INSURE (112) 26–28 8 vs. 13 n/a 14 vs. 15 46
Kanmaz et al. (45) NCPAP + LISA (100) vs. nCPAP INSURE (100) <30 10 vs. 20* 16 vs. 13 34 vs. 45 40
Tapia et al. (46) NCPAP + INSURE (131) vs. MV (125) 800–1,500 g 7 vs. 10 8 vs. 9 14 vs. 19 30

NCPAP, Nasal continuous positive pressure ventilation; IMV, Invasive mechanical ventilation; INSURE, INtubation, SURfactant and Extubation; LISA, Less invasive surfactant administration; GA, Gestational age (weeks) *P < 0.05.