RESUMO
OBJECTIVES@#To systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of noninvasive high-frequency oscillatory ventilation (NHFOV) versus nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) as post-extubation respiratory support in preterm infants.@*METHODS@#China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Data, Chinese Journal Full-text Database, China Biology Medicine disc, PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were searched for articles on NHFOV and NIPPV as post-extubation respiratory support in preterm infants published up to August 31, 2022. RevMan 5.4 software and Stata 17.0 software were used for a Meta analysis to compare related indices between the NHFOV and NIPPV groups, including reintubation rate within 72 hours after extubation, partial pressure of carbon dioxide (PCO2) at 6-24 hours after switch to noninvasive assisted ventilation, and the incidence rates of bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD), air leak, nasal damage, periventricular leukomalacia (PVL), intraventricular hemorrhage (IVH), and retinopathy of prematurity (ROP).@*RESULTS@#A total of 9 randomized controlled trials were included. The Meta analysis showed that compared with the NIPPV group, the NHFOV group had significantly lower reintubation rate within 72 hours after extubation (RR=0.67, 95%CI: 0.52-0.88, P=0.003) and PCO2 at 6-24 hours after switch to noninvasive assisted ventilation (MD=-4.12, 95%CI: -6.12 to -2.13, P<0.001). There was no significant difference between the two groups in the incidence rates of complications such as BPD, air leak, nasal damage, PVL, IVH, and ROP (P>0.05).@*CONCLUSIONS@#Compared with NIPPV, NHFOV can effectively remove CO2 and reduce the risk of reintubation, without increasing the incidence of complications such as BPD, air leak, nasal damage, PVL, and IVH, and therefore, it can be used as a sequential respiratory support mode for preterm infants after extubation.