Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We compared the application value of noninvasive positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) and intermittent positive pressure ventilation (IPPV) in the treatment of very premature infants and extremely low birth weight infants. METHODS: Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to identify factors influencing the transition from noninvasive to invasive ventilation in this infant cohort. RESULTS: Among extremely preterm infants, 83.3% with gestational age <25 weeks transitioned from noninvasive to invasive ventilation, as did 80.6% of those with birth weight <1000 grams. Multivariate analysis indicated that gestational age <25 weeks, birth weight <1000 grams, and Apgar score ≤7 were significant factors affecting the likelihood of transitioning to invasive ventilation. The survival rate at discharge was 94% for the NIPPV group compared with 89% for the IPPV group. The NIPPV group demonstrated significantly lower rates of complications, shorter weaning times, and reduced lengths of hospital stay compared with the IPPV group. CONCLUSIONS: Both NIPPV and IPPV effectively improved oxygenation and ventilation in extremely preterm infants. However, NIPPV showed significant advantages in reducing complications, shortening weaning time, and decreasing the hospital stay duration. Prioritizing the use of NIPPV may enhance treatment outcomes and survival quality, providing evidence-based support for clinical practice.