In Reply We thank Wang and Shi for their interest in our study and for drawing attention to aspects concerning the number of patients in our study. Initially, we would like to clarify that the Kugelman et al and Sai Sunil Kishore et al studies1,2 included all infants for the definition of bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD), while we only included the survivors to 36 weeks’ postmenstrual age. Our trial randomly assigned 100 infants in each group (nasal continuous positive airway pressure and nasal intermittent positive-pressure ventilation)3; however, at 36 weeks we only had 83 infants in the nasal intermittent positive-pressure ventilation group and 80 infants in the nasal continuous positive airway pressure group. Even if we did include all the infants, the results would be very similar (risk ratio, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.09-3.61), with no difference found between the groups and considerable heterogeneity (P = .04; I2 = 70%).
Meneses J, Bhandari V, Alves JG. Questions Concerning Nasal Intermittent Positive-Pressure Ventilation vs Nasal Continuous Positive Airway Pressure—Reply. JAMA Pediatr. 2013;167(9):873. doi:10.1001/jamapediatrics.2013.2212