A multicenter randomized trial comparing two surfactants for the treatment of neonatal respiratory distress syndrome. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Neonatal Research Network. Comparative efficacy of exosurf and survanta surfactants on early clinical course of respiratory distress syndrome and complications of prematurity. Pumactant and poractant alfa for treatment of respiratory distress syndrome in neonates born at 25-29 weeks' gestation: a randomised trial. A multicenter randomized masked comparison trial of synthetic surfactant versus calf lung surfactant extract in the prevention of neonatal respiratory distress syndrome. A multicenter randomized, masked comparison trial of natural versus synthetic surfactant for the treatment of respiratory distress syndrome. Randomized trial comparing natural and synthetic surfactant: increased infection rate after natural surfactant? Neonatal respiratory care and infant mortality in emerging countries. Modified bovine surfactant (Survanta) versus a protein-free surfactant (Exosurf) in the treatment of respiratory distress syndrome in preterm infants: a pilot study.
To compare the efficacy of two surfactants, Exosurf Neonatal (Burroughs Wellcome Co.) and Survanta (Ross Laboratories), for the treatment of neonatal respiratory distress syndrome.
                Multicenter randomized trial.
                Eleven tertiary care university neonatal intensive care units participating in the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Neonatal Research Network.
                Newborn infants (n = 617) weighing 501 to 1500 gm with respiratory distress syndrome who were receiving assisted ventilation with 30% oxygen or more within 6 hours of birth were enrolled between January 1991 and January 1992.
                Infants were randomly assigned to receive up to four intratracheal doses of either Exosurf Neonatal (n = 309) or Survanta (n = 308).
                The occurrence of death or bronchopulmonary dysplasia 28 days after birth and the average fraction of inspired oxygen (FIO2) and mean airway pressure (MAP) during the first 72 hours after treatment.
                Death or bronchopulmonary dysplasia occurred in 67% of the infants in the Exosurf group and 62% of those in the Survanta group (adjusted relative risk, 1.07; 95% confidence interval, 0.96 to 1.20). During the 72 hours after the first surfactant dose, the average FIO2 (+/- SEM) was 0.50 +/- 0.01 for Exosurf and 0.42 +/- 0.01 for Survanta (difference, 0.08; 95% confidence interval, 0.05 to 0.11); the average MAP (+/- SEM) was 7.64 +/- 0.21 cm H2O for Exosurf and 6.93 +/- 0.21 cm H2O for Survanta (difference, 0.71 cm H2O; 95% confidence interval, 0.13 to 1.29 cm H2O). There was no difference between the groups in the incidence of other neonatal morbidities or in the duration of hospitalization, assisted ventilation, or supplemental oxygen administration.
                We found no difference between treatment groups in the incidence of death or bronchopulmonary dysplasia, although we did observe a difference in the initial response to treatment as measured by FIO2 and MAP. To determine the comparative efficacy of Exosurf Neonatal and Survanta surfactants on the early course of respiratory distress syndrome (RDS), arterial blood gases, ventilatory support, outcome morbidity rate, and complications of prematurity and RDS.
                Medical records from 203 premature newborn infants undergoing mechanical ventilation for respiratory distress syndrome, and who received up to four rescue doses of either Exosurf or Survanta, were retrospectively reviewed.
                All groups were comparable for birth weight and gestational age. Although the two randomized groups were similar in severity of RDS based on fraction of inspired oxygen (FIO2) and ventilatory support, a significantly greater improvement in respiratory function as evidenced by FIO2, mean airway pressure, alveolar-arterial partial pressure of oxygen difference, and oxygen index, was observed in the Survanta group from 12 hours (p < 0.05) through 48 hours (p < 0.01). Comparison of outcome morbidity rate by gestational age showed a higher occurrence of retinopathy of prematurity (p < 0.02) among the older infants (28 to 32 weeks) who were treated with Exosurf.
                Survanta exerted a significantly faster response in the early clinical course of RDS compared with Exosurf. However, no difference in the impact on eventual respiratory outcome was observed. We therefore conclude that both surfactants are effective for the treatment of RDS. Exogenous surfactant preparations vary in their constitution and biophysical properties. Synthetic and animal-derived preparations lower the rate of death compared with controls. No significant differences in mortality or important long-term clinical outcomes have been shown between them in randomised trials. We did a randomised controlled trial to compare pumactant, a synthetic surfactant, with poractant alfa, an animal-derived surfactant, both of which are widely used in the UK.
                We enrolled 212 neonates born between 25 weeks' and 29 weeks and 6 days' gestation who were intubated for presumed surfactant deficiency and were free from life-threatening malformations. We randomly assigned 105 neonates poractant alfa, and 107 pumactant. The primary outcome was duration of high-dependency care and mortality was a secondary outcome. Analysis was by intention to treat.
                Outcome data were analysed for 199 babies. The trial was stopped on the recommendation of the data and safety monitoring committee because mortality assumed a greater importance than the primary outcome. Predischarge mortality differed significantly between groups, in favour of poractant alfa (14.1 vs 31.0%, p=0.006; odds ratio 0.37 [95% CI 0.18-0.76). This difference was sustained after adjustment for centre, gestation, birthweight, sex, plurality, and use of antenatal steroids.
                Mortality was unexpectedly lower among neonates who received poractant alfa than among those who received pumactant, and was independent of all the variables we investigated. Stopping the trial early may have widened the difference between the treatment groups. To compare the efficacy and safety of a synthetic surfactant (Exosurf Neonatal, Burroughs Wellcome Co) and a surfactant extract of calf lung lavage (Infasurf, IND #27,169, ONY, Inc) in the prevention of neonatal respiratory distress syndrome (RDS).
                Ten-center randomized masked comparison trial.
                Premature infants (n = 871) <29 weeks gestational age by best obstetric estimate.
                Infants were randomly assigned to a course of treatment with Exosurf Neonatal (n = 438) or Infasurf (n = 433) at birth, and if still intubated, at 12 and 24 hours of age. Crossover treatment was allowed within 72 hours of age if severe respiratory failure (defined as two consecutive a/A PO2 ratios </=.10) persisted after three doses of the randomized surfactant. Primary
                Three primary outcome measures of efficacy [the incidence of RDS; the incidence of RDS death; and the incidence of survival without bronchopulmonary dysplasia at 28 days after birth] were compared using linear regression techniques.
                Of 871 randomized infants, 18 infants did not receive treatment with a study surfactant, and 25 infants did not meet all eligibility criteria. The primary analysis of efficacy was performed in the 846 eligible infants and analysis of safety outcomes in the 853 infants who received study surfactant. Demographic characteristics did not differ between the two treatment groups. Compared with Exosurf, Infasurf treatment resulted in a 62% decrease in the incidence of RDS (Infasurf, 16% vs Exosurf, 42%) and a 70% decrease in RDS death (Infasurf, 1.7% vs Exosurf, 5.4%) but did not increase the incidence of survival without bronchopulmonary dysplasia at 28 days. Treatment with Infasurf resulted in significant improvement in several secondary outcome measures. Infasurf-treated infants had lower average FIO2 (Infasurf, .33 [SEM] vs Exosurf, .42; difference .08; 95% confidence interval [CI], .06 to .11) and average mean airway pressure (Infasurf, 6.0 cm H2O vs Exosurf, 7.1 cm H2O; difference 1.1 cm H2O; 95% CI, .7 to 1.6 cm H2O) for the first 72 hours of life. Crossover surfactant treatment was significantly less frequent in the Infasurf compared with the Exosurf group (Infasurf, 1% vs Exosurf, 6%). Complications (bradycardia, clinical airway obstruction, and transcutaneous arterial desaturation) associated with second and third, but not initial, surfactant treatments were observed more frequently in the Infasurf treatment group. Infasurf-treated infants had significantly less air leak (</=7 days) (Infasurf, 8% vs Exosurf, 14%; adjusted relative risk [ARR] .55; 95% CI, .37 to .81). Severe intraventricular hemorrhage (IVH) (grade 3 and 4) did not differ between the two groups (Infasurf, 11.8% vs Exosurf, 8.3%; ARR 1.41; 95% CI, .94 to 2.09) but total IVH occurred more frequently in Infasurf-treated infants (Infasurf, 39.0% vs Exosurf, 29.9%; ARR, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.08 to 1.57).
                Significant reductions in the incidence of RDS, the severity of early respiratory disease, the incidence of pulmonary air leaks associated with RDS, and the mortality attributable to RDS suggest that Infasurf is a more effective surfactant preparation than Exosurf Neonatal in the prophylaxis of RDS. However, Infasurf prophylaxis as used in this study was also associated with a greater risk of total but not severe IVH. To compare the efficacy and safety of two surfactant preparations in the treatment of respiratory distress syndrome (RDS).
                We conducted a randomized, masked comparison trial at 21 centers. Infants with RDS who were undergoing mechanical ventilation were eligible for treatment with two doses of either a synthetic (Exosurf) or natural (Infasurf) surfactant if the ratio of arterial to alveolar partial pressure of oxygen was less than or equal to 0.22. Crossover treatment was allowed within 96 hours of age if severe respiratory failure (defined as two consecutive arterial/alveolar oxygen tension ratios < or = 0.10) persisted after two doses of the randomly assigned surfactant. Four primary outcome measures of efficacy (the incidence of pulmonary air leak (< or = 7 days); the severity of RDS; the incidence of death from RDS; and the incidence of survival without bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD) at 28 days after birth) were compared by means of linear regression techniques.
                The primary analysis of efficacy was performed in 1033 eligible infants and an analysis of safety outcomes in the 1126 infants who received study surfactant. Preentry demographic characteristics and respiratory status were similar for the two treatment groups, except for a small but significant difference in mean gestational age (0.5 week) that favored the infasurf treatment group. Pulmonary air leak (< or = 7 days) occurred in 21% of Exosurf- and 11% of infasurf-treated infants (adjusted relative risk, 0.53; 95% confidence interval, 0.40 to 0.71; p < or = 0.0001). During the 72 hours after the initial surfactant treatment, the average fraction of inspired oxygen (+/-SEM) was 0.47 +/- 0.01 for Exosurf- and 0.39 +/- 0.01 for infasurf-treated infants (difference, 0.08; 95% confidence interval, 0.06 to 0.10; p < 0.0001); the average mean airway pressure (+/-SEM) was 8.6 +/- 0.1 cm H2O; for Exosurf- and 7.2 +/- 0.1 cm H2O for Infasurf-treated infants (difference, 1.4 cm H2O; 95% confidence interval, 1.0 to 1.8 cm H2O; p < 0.0001). The incidences of RDS-related death, total respiratory death, death to discharge, and survival without bronchopulmonary dysplasia at 28 days after birth did not differ. The number of days of more than 30% inspired oxygen and of assisted ventilation, but not the duration of hospitalization, were significantly lower in Infasurf-treated infants.
                Compared with Exosurf, Infasurf provided more effective therapy for RDS as assessed by significant reductions in the severity of respiratory disease and in the incidence of air leak complications. The efficacy of a natural porcine surfactant and a synthetic surfactant were compared in a randomized trial. In three neonatal intensive care units, 228 neonates with respiratory distress and a ratio of arterial to alveolar partial pressure of oxygen <0.22 were randomly assigned to receive either Curosurf 100 mgkg-1 or Exosurf Neonatal 5 ml.kg-1. After Curosurf, the fraction of inspired oxygen was lower from 15 min (0.45 +/- 0.22 vs 0.70 +/- 0.22, p = 0.0001) to 6 h (0.48 +/- 0.26 vs 0.64 +/- 0.23, p = 0.0001) and the mean airway pressure was lower at 1 h (8.3 +/- 3.2 mm H20 vs 9.4 +/- 3.1 mm H20, p = 0.01). Thereafter the respiratory parameters were similar. The duration of mechanical ventilation (median 6 vs 5 d) and the duration of oxygen supplementation (median 5 vs 4 d) were similar for Curosurf and Exosurf. After Curosurf, C-reactive protein value over 40 mg l-1 occurred in 45% (vs 12%; RR 3.62, 95%CI 2.12-6.17, p = 0.001), leukopenia in 52% (vs 28%; RR 1.85, 95% CI 1.31-2.61, p = 0.001) and bacteraemia in 11% (vs 4%; RR 3.17, 95% CI 1.05-9.52, p < 0.05). We conclude that when given as rescue therapy Curosurf had no advantage compared with Exosurf in addition to the more effective initial response. Curosurf may increase the risk of infection. nan We undertook a prospective, randomized, non-blinded pilot study to determine whether infants with respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) who were treated with protein-containing bovine surfactant (Survanta, Ross/Abbott Laboratories, Columbus, Ohio) had earlier and larger responses in gas exchange when compared with similar infants treated with a synthetic surfactant (Exosurf, Burroughs Wellcome, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina). Forty-one infants weighing between 600 g and 1750 g at birth with RDS of sufficient severity to require assisted ventilation with an FiO2 > 0.39 were enrolled in the study and treated with surfactant from 1 to 8 hours after birth. Infants were randomly selected to receive treatment with either Exosurf or Survanta. Despite randomization, the Survanta group was overrepresented with factors associated with greater severity of RDS (lower birthweight, more males, and fewer African Americans). No statistically significant difference was found in the primary outcome measure (arterial/alveolar PaO2 > 0.3 at 24 hours) by univariate or multivariate analysis. The percentage of responders in the Survanta-treated group was significantly increased 24 hours after treatment in two of four secondary measures of oxygenation when analyzed by univariate tests using one-tailed P values. Based on these results, we anticipate that acute outcomes after Survanta or Exosurf will approximate those found in this trial and that differences in measures of oxygenation between treatment groups will approximate 30% to 50% 24 hours after initial treatment.
Both natural surfactant extracts and synthetic surfactant extracts are effective in the treatment and prevention of respiratory distress syndrome. Comparative trials demonstrate greater early improvement in the requirement for ventilator support, fewer pneumothoraces, and fewer deaths associated with natural surfactant extract treatment. Natural surfactant may be associated with an increase in intraventricular hemorrhage, though the more serious hemorrhages (Grade 3 and 4) are not increased. Despite these concerns, natural surfactant extracts would seem to be the more desirable choice when compared to currently available synthetic surfactants.