Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Observational Study
. 2022 Feb;42(2):202-208.
doi: 10.1038/s41372-021-01227-y. Epub 2021 Oct 21.

Survival and short-term respiratory outcomes of <750 g infants initially intubated with 2.0 mm vs. 2.5 mm endotracheal tubes

Affiliations
Observational Study

Survival and short-term respiratory outcomes of <750 g infants initially intubated with 2.0 mm vs. 2.5 mm endotracheal tubes

Jennifer N Berger et al. J Perinatol. 2022 Feb.

Abstract

Objectives: To compare survival and short-term respiratory outcomes of infants weighing <750 g initially intubated with 2.0 mm versus 2.5 mm endotracheal tube (ETT).

Study design: Retrospective, observational cohort study.

Results: Of 149 inborn infants weighing <750 g admitted to the NICU, 69 (46%) were intubated with 2.0 mm ETT, 78 with 2.5 mm ETT (53%), and 2 infants never required intubation. Infants intubated with 2.0 mm ETT were more premature (median gestational age (GA) 23 weeks (22, 24) vs. 24 weeks (24, 25) p < 0.0001), smaller (median birth weight 545 g (450, 616) vs. 648 g (579, 700), p < 0.0001), and more frequently intubated at delivery (96% vs. 68%, p < 0.00001). Survival to discharge was similar 77%, 53/69 and 87%, 68/78 (p = 0.09). Adjusted for GA, there were no significant differences in ventilator days (p = 0.7338) or Grade 3 BPD.

Conclusions: Premature infants born at a median GA of 23 weeks and median birth weight of 545 g can be successfully managed with 2.0 mm ETT.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no competing interests.

References

    1. Ecker JL, Kaimal A, Mercer BM, Blackwell SC, deRegnier RAO, Farrell RM, et al. Periviable birth: interim update. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2016;215:B2–B12.e1. - PubMed
    1. Lau C, Ambalavanan N, Chakraborty H, Wingate MS, Carlo WA. Extremely low birth weight and infant mortality rates in the United States. Pediatrics. 2013;131:855–60. doi: 10.1542/peds.2012-2471. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Stoll BJ, Hansen NI, Bell EF, Walsh MC, Carlo WA, Shankaran S, et al. Trends in care practices, morbidity, and mortality of extremely preterm neonates, 1993-2012. JAMA. 2015;314:1039–51. doi: 10.1001/jama.2015.10244. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Younge N, Goldstein RF, Bann CM, Hintz SR, Patel RM, Smith PB, et al. Survival and neurodevelopmental outcomes among periviable infants. N Engl J Med. 2017;376:617–28.. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1605566. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Fayoux P, Devisme L, Merrot O, Marciniak B. Determination of endotracheal tube size in a perinatal population: an anatomical and experimental study. Anesthesiology. 2006;104:954–60. doi: 10.1097/00000542-200605000-00011. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types