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
Clinical Trial
. 1994 Mar;124(3):447-54.
doi: 10.1016/s0022-3476(94)70374-4.

Prospective, randomized comparison of high-frequency oscillation and conventional ventilation in candidates for extracorporeal membrane oxygenation

Affiliations
Clinical Trial

Prospective, randomized comparison of high-frequency oscillation and conventional ventilation in candidates for extracorporeal membrane oxygenation

R H Clark et al. J Pediatr. 1994 Mar.

Abstract

Objective: To compare the safety and efficacy of high-frequency oscillation (HFO) with conventional ventilation in the treatment of neonates with respiratory failure.

Design: We conducted a multicenter, prospective, randomized trial. Patients were stratified according to pulmonary diagnosis and then were randomly selected for conventional ventilation or HFO. A balanced crossover design offered patients who met criteria of treatment failure a trial of the alternative mode of ventilation.

Setting: Four tertiary, level 3 neonatal intensive care units accepting regional referrals for extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

Patients: Neonates were eligible for enrollment if their gestational age was > 34 weeks, their birth weight was > or = 2 kg, they were < 14 days of age, they required fractional inspired oxygen > 0.50 and a mean airway pressure > 0.98 kPa (10 cm H2O) to support adequate oxygenation, and they required a peak inspiratory pressure > 2.9 kPa (30 cm H2O) and a rate > 40 breaths per minute to support adequate ventilation. Exclusion criteria were lethal congenital anomalies, profound shock, need for cardiopulmonary resuscitation, and failure to obtain consent.

Main results: Of 79 patients studied, 40 were assigned to conventional ventilation and 39 to HFO. Neonates randomly assigned to HFO required higher peak pressure (3.8 +/- 0.5 vs 3.3 +/- 0.8 kPa, 39 +/- 5 vs 34 +/- 8 cm H2O; p = 0.004) and more often met extracorporeal membrane oxygenation criteria (67% vs 40%; p = 0.03) at study entry than did those given conventional ventilation. Twenty-four patients (60%) assigned to conventional ventilation met treatment failure criteria compared with 17 (44%) of those assigned to HFO (not significant). Of the 24 patients in whom conventional ventilation failed, 15 (63%) responded to HFO; 4 (23%) of the 17 in whom HFO failed responded to conventional ventilation (p = 0.03). There were no differences between the two groups with respect to outcome, need for extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, or complications.

Conclusions: We conclude that HFO is a safe and effective rescue technique in the treatment of neonates with respiratory failure in whom conventional ventilation fails.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

  • Neonatal ECMO: iron lung of the 1990s?
    Walsh-Sukys M, Stork EK, Martin RJ. Walsh-Sukys M, et al. J Pediatr. 1994 Mar;124(3):427-30. doi: 10.1016/s0022-3476(94)70366-3. J Pediatr. 1994. PMID: 8120713 No abstract available.

LinkOut - more resources