Non-invasive Ventilation

  • Brigitte Lemyre
  • Haresh KirpalaniEmail author
  1. I.
    1. A.

      This chapter covers methods of assisted ventilation without an endotracheal tube in the trachea, and using interfaces either just at the nares alone or sealing the entire nose with a mask. These can deliver positive pressure throughout the respiratory cycle with additional intermittent increases in the airway pressure. This additional intermittent airway pressure can be either synchronized to the patient’s own breaths or non-synchronized, depending on the delivery system used.

    2. B.

      The terminology used for non-invasive ventilation can be confusing. When non-invasive ventilation is provided via a conventional ventilator, it usually delivers short (0.3–0.5 s) but high (20–25 cm H2O) peak pressure, similar to a ventilator breath.

    3. C.
      The following abbreviations denote commonly used synonyms:
      1. 1.

        Nasal ventilation (NV)

      2. 2.

        Nasal intermittent mandatory ventilation (NIMV)

      3. 3.

        Nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV)

    4. D.

      The term NIPPV is used here.

    5. E.



Continuous Positive Airway Pressure Gastric Perforation Extubation Failure High Tidal Volume Nasal Mask 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Suggested Reading

  1. Barrington KJ, Bull D, Finer NN. Randomized trial of nasal synchronized intermittent mandatory ventilation compared with continuous positive airway pressure after extubation of very low birth weight infants. Pediatrics. 2001;107:638.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bhandari V. Nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation in the newborn: review of literature and evidence-based guidelines. J Perinatol. 2010;30(8):505.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bhandari V, Finer NN, Ehrenkranz RA, Saha S, Das A, Walsh MC, Engle WA, VanMeurs KP, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Neonatal Research Network. Synchronized nasal intermittent positive-pressure ventilation and neonatal outcomes. Pediatrics. 2009;124(2):517–26.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bisceglia M, Belcastro V, Poerio F, Raimondi I, Mesurace C, Crugliano C, Pio CU. A comparison of nasal intermittent versus continuous pressure delivery for the treatment of moderate respiratory syndrome in preterm infants. Minerva Pediatr. 2007;59(2):91.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Chang HY, Claure N, D’urgard C, Torres J, Nwajei P, Bancalari E. Effects of synchronization during nasal ventilation in clinically stable preterm infants. Pediatr Res. 2011;69(1):84–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Colaizy TT, Younis UM, Bell EF, Klein JM. Nasal high-frequency ventilation for premature infants. Acta Paediatr. 2008;97(11):1518–22.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Davis PG, Lemyre B, de Paoli AG. Nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) versus nasal continuous positive airway pressure (nCPAP) for preterm neonates after extubation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2001;3:CD003212.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Davis PG, Morley CJ, Owen LS. Non-invasive respiratory support of preterm neonates with respiratory distress: continuous positive airway pressure and nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation. Semin Fetal Neonatal Med. 2009;14:14.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. De Paoli AG, Davis PG, Lemyre B. Nasal continuous positive airway pressure versus nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation for preterm neonates: a systematic review and meta-­analysis. Acta Paediatr. 2003;92:70.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dumas De La Roque E, Bertrand C, Tandonnet O, Rebola M, Roquand E, Renesme L, Elleau C. Nasal high frequency percussive ventilation versus nasal continuous positive airway pressure in transient tachypnea of the newborn: a pilot randomized controlled trial (NCT00556738). Pediatr Pulmonol. 2011;46:218–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Friedlich P, Lecart C, Posen R, et al. A randomized trial of nasopharyngeal synchronized intermittent mandatory ventilation versus nasopharyngeal continuous positive airway pressure in very low birth weight infants after extubation. J Perinatol. 1999;19:413.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Garland JS, Nelson DB, Rice T, Neu J. Increased risk of gastrointestinal perforations in neonates mechanically ventilated with either face mask or nasal prongs. Pediatrics. 1985;76:406.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Khalaf MN, Brodsky N, Hurley J, Bhandari V. A prospective randomized controlled trial comparing synchronized nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation versus nasal continuous positive airway pressure as modes of extubation. Pediatrics. 2001;108:13.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Khorana M, Paradeevisut H, Sangtawesin V, Kanjanapatanakul W, Chotigeat U, Ayutthaya JKN. A randomized trial of non-synchronized nasopharyngeal intermittent mandatory ventilation (nsNIMV) vs nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP) in the prevention of extubation failure in preterm <1500 grams. J Med Assoc Thai. 2008;91 suppl 3:S136.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Kiciman NM, Andreasson B, Bernstein G, et al. Thoracoabdominal motion in newborns during ventilation delivered by endotracheal tube or nasal prongs. Pediatr Pulmonol. 1998;25:175.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kishore MSS, Dutta S, Kumar P. Early nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation versus continuous positive airway pressure for respiratory distress syndrome. Acta Paediatr. 2009;98:1412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kugelman A, Fefferkorn I, Riskin A, Chistyakov I, Kaufman B, Bader D. Nasal intermittent mandatory ventilation versus nasal continuous positive airway pressure for respiratory distress syndrome: a randomized controlled prospective study. J Pediatr. 2007;150:521.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kugelman A, Bar A, Riskin A, Chistyakov I, Mor F, Bader D. Nasal respiratory support in premature infants: short-term physiological effects and comfort assessment. Acta Paediatr. 2008;97(5):557–61.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lemyre B, Davis PG, de Paoli AG. Nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) versus nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP) for apnea of prematurity. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2002;1:CD002272.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Lin CH, Want ST, Lin YJ, Yeh TF. Efficacy of nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation in treating apnea of prematurity. Pediatr Pulmonol. 1998;26:349.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Llewellyn MA, Tilak KS, Swyer PR. A controlled trial of ventilation using an oro-nasal mask. Arch Dis Child. 1970;45:453–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Meneses J, Bhandari V, Alves JG, Herrmann D. Noninvasive ventilation for respiratory distress syndrome: a randomized controlled trial. Pediatrics. 2011;127(2):300.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Owen LS, Morley CJ, Davis PG. Pressure variation during ventilator generated nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation in preterm infants. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2010;95(5):F359–64.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Pantalitschka T, Sievers J, Urschitz MS, Herberts T, Reher C, Poets CF. Randomised crossover trial of four nasal respiratory support systems for apnoea of prematurity in very low birthweight infants. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2009;94:F245.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Reyburn B, Li M, Metcalfe DB, Kroll NJ, et al. Nasal ventilation alters mesenchymal cell turnover and improves alveolarization in preterm lambs. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2008;178(4):407–18.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Ryan CA, Finer NN, Peters KL. Nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation offers no advantages over nasal continuous positive airway pressure in apnea of prematurity. Am J Dis Child. 1989;143:1196.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Squires AJ, Hyndman M. Prevention of nasal injuries secondary to NCPAP application in the ELBW infant. Neonatal Netw. 2009;28(1):13–27.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. van der Hoeven M, Brouwer E, Blanco CE. Nasal high frequency ventilation in neonates with moderate respiratory insufficiency. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 1998;79(1):F61–3.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Division of Neonatology, Department of PediatricsUniversity of Ottawa, Children’s Hospital of Eastern OntarioOttawaCanada
  2. 2.The Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, University of Pennsylvania School of MedicinePhiladelphiaUSA

Personalised recommendations