To Compare the Efficacy and Complication of Nasal Prongs vs Nasal Mask CPAP in Neonates

<p><strong>Background</strong>: CPAP refers to the application of positive pressure to the airway of a spontaneously breathing infant throughout the respiratory cycle.</p><p><strong>Objectives</strong>: To study the clinical pattern of CPAP in neonate</p><p><strong>Method</strong>: Total 75 patient were enrolled in the study, 38 in the nasal mask and 37 were in the nasal prongs group. The result of the study was analysed by using Fisher exact test and unpaired t test for continuous variable.</p><p><strong>Results</strong>: The base line characteristics such as birth weight, male and female, match in both the groups. The babies who were &lt; 32wks and &lt; 1500gm birth weight had more frequent trauma in both the groups. The severity of trauma was more as the duration of CPAP was increasing in both the groups. There was no difference of co morbidities like PDA, ROP, IVH in both the groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion</strong>: The of duration of CPAP was less in nasal prongs than nasal mask which is statistically significant, but there were no statistically significance of nasal trauma in comparison of both the groups</p>

Postobstructive Pulmonary Oedema—A Case Series and Review

Six cases of post-extubation pulmonary oedema in otherwise healthy patients are reported. All were preceded by an episode of laryngospasm and followed a clinical course similar to that previously documented in cases of post-obstructive pulmonary oedema. Frank haemoptysis was a feature of five of the presentations. One patient was reintubated and ventilated, two were admitted to the intensive care unit for mask CPAP, one was managed with CPAP in the recovery ward and two with supplemental oxygen only. All cases resolved fully within 24 hours. Some evidence points to the syndrome being the result of airway bleeding rather than true pulmonary oedema. The literature suggests that it occurs more commonly than is generally thought, with a frequency of 0.05 to 0.1% of all anaesthetics, and is often unrecognised or misdiagnosed. Most cases occur in the early postoperative period, so anaesthetists are well placed to witness, investigate and manage this interesting condition.