• Marta Aguar, María Cernada, María Brugada, Ana Gimeno, Antonio Gutierrez, and Máximo Vento.
• Division of Neonatology, University & Polytechnic Hospital La Fe, Valencia, Spain; Neonatal Research Group, Health Research Institute La Fe, Valencia, Spain.
• Acta Paediatr. 2014 Jun 1;103(6):e229-33.

AimPreterm infants requiring surfactant replacement have been treated using the INSURE technique, which requires sedation and comprises tracheal intubation, surfactant instillation and extubation. However, minimally invasive surfactant therapy (MIST) does not require sedation, minimises airway injury and avoids placing positive pressure ventilation on an immature lung. This study compared the feasibility of the two techniques and the outcomes in preterm babies with respiratory distress syndrome (RDS).MethodsPreterm infants with RDS prospectively received surfactant via a gastric tube placed in the trachea by direct laryngoscopy with no sedation. Technique-related complications and respiratory outcomes were analysed.ResultsWe compared 44 patients who received MIST with a historic cohort of 31 patients who received INSURE. This showed no differences in the rate of intubation and mechanical ventilation in the first 72 h, or secondary respiratory outcomes and relevant morbidities, between the babies who received INSURE and those who received MIST. More babies in the MIST group (35%) needed a second dose of surfactant than the INSURE group (6.5%) (p < 0.0001).ConclusionSurfactant administration using MIST, with no sedation, is feasible in preterm infants with RDS. No significant differences in secondary respiratory outcomes were found between the MIST and INSURE techniques.©2014 Foundation Acta Paediatrica. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

58 keywords...

hide…