Comparison of LISA and INSURE Methods in Surfactant Application in Preterm Babies with Respiratory Distress Syndrome

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: This study was conducted to compare the use of surfactant by invasive (intubation tube) and less invasive (thin catheter) methods in preterm babies who received surfactant treatment with the diagnosis of respiratory distress syndrome. METHODS: The babies whose gestational week was 32nd gestational week and/or below and who needed surfactant treatment were included in the study. Sixty patients who needed surfactant replacement for respiratory distress syndrome were included in the study. Poractant alfa (200 mg/kg/dose) was given to all cases. The cases were randomized into LISA and INSURE group. RESULTS: During the administration of surfactant, no complications were observed in 90% of the patients in the INSURE group and in 63.3% of the patients in the LISA group. In the LISA group, it was found that intubation was significantly lower in the first 72 hours in terms of flow. It was found that the need for mechanical ventilation and mortality rates were higher in INSURE. No citations were found among the groups when he asked for repeated surfactant. There was no significant feature among the groups in terms of Respiratory distress syndrome complications. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Both methods can be used in surfactant replacement therapy, but desaturation is more common during surfactant treatment with a thin catheter. Application difficulties of the catheter method are the disadvantages of the method. However, it seems more successful than the INSURE method because it does not require intubation and positive pressure ventilation, the need for mechanical ventilation support and the duration of stay in mechanical ventilation is less.

Keywords

• premature
• respiratory distress syndrome
• surfactant therapy
• lisa
• insure