Short-term effects of synchronized vs. non-synchronized NIPPV in preterm infants: study protocol for an unmasked randomized crossover trial.

BACKGROUND: Non-invasive ventilation (NIV) has been recommended as the best respiratory support for preterm infants with respiratory distress syndrome (RDS). However, the best NIV technique to be used as first intention in RDS management has not yet been established. Nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) may be synchronized (SNIPPV) or non-synchronized to the infant's breathing efforts. The aim of the study is to evaluate the short-term effects of SNIPPV vs. NIPPV on the cardiorespiratory events, trying to identify the best ventilation modality for preterm infants at their first approach to NIV ventilation support. METHODS: An unmasked randomized crossover study with three treatment phases was designed. All newborn infants < 32 weeks of gestational age with RDS needing NIV ventilation as first intention or after extubation will be consecutively enrolled in the study and randomized to the NIPPV or SNIPPV arm. After stabilization, enrolled patients will be alternatively ventilated with two different techniques for two time frames of 4 h each. NIPPV and SNIPPV will be administered with the same ventilator and the same interface, maintaining continuous assisted ventilation without patient discomfort. During the whole duration of the study, the patient's cardiorespiratory data and data from the ventilator will be simultaneously recorded using a polygraph connected to a computer. The primary outcome is the frequency of episodes of oxygen desaturation. Secondary outcomes are the number of the cardiorespiratory events, FiO2 necessity, newborn pain score evaluation, synchronization index, and thoracoabdominal asynchrony. The calculated sample size was of 30 patients. DISCUSSION: It is known that NIPPV produces a percentage of ineffective acts due to asynchronies between the ventilator and the infant's breaths. On the other hand, an ineffective synchronization could increase work of breathing. Our hypothesis is that an efficient synchronization could reduce the respiratory work and increase the volume per minute exchanged without interfering with the natural respiratory rhythm of the patient with RDS. The results of this study will allow us to evaluate the effectiveness of the synchronization, demonstrating whether SNIPPV is the most effective non-invasive ventilation mode in preterm infants with RDS at their first approach to NIV ventilation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03289936 . Registered on September 21, 2017.

Enteral Nutrition Tolerance And REspiratory Support (ENTARES) Study in preterm infants: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) and feeding intolerance are common conditions in preterm infants and among the major causes of neonatal mortality and morbidity. For many years, preterm infants with RDS have been treated with mechanical ventilation, increasing risks of acute lung injury and bronchopulmonary dysplasia. In recent years non-invasive ventilation techniques have been developed. Showing similar efficacy and risk of bronchopulmonary dysplasia, nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP) and heated humidified high-flow nasal cannula (HHHFNC) have become the most widespread techniques in neonatal intensive care units. However, their impact on nutrition, particularly on feeding tolerance and risk of complications, is still unknown in preterm infants. The aim of the study is to evaluate the impact of NCPAP vs HHHFNC on enteral feeding and to identify the most suitable technique for preterm infants with RDS. METHODS: A multicenter randomized single-blind controlled trial was designed. All preterm infants with a gestational age of 25-29 weeks treated with NCPAP or HHHFNC for RDS and demonstrating stability for at least 48 h along with the compliance with inclusion criteria (age less than 7 days, need for non-invasive respiratory support, suitability to start enteral feeding) will be enrolled in the study and randomized to the NCPAP or HHHFNC arm. All patients will be monitored until discharge, and data will be analyzed according to an intention-to-treat model. The primary outcome is the time to reach full enteral feeding, while parameters of respiratory support, feeding tolerance, and overall health status will be evaluated as secondary outcomes. The sample size was calculated at 141 patients per arm. DISCUSSION: The identification of the most suitable technique (NCPAP vs HHHFNC) for preterm infants with feeding intolerance could reduce gastrointestinal complications, improve growth, and reduce hospital length of stay, thus improving clinical outcomes and reducing health costs. The evaluation of the timing of oral feeding could be useful in understanding the influence that these techniques could have on the development of sucking-swallow coordination. Moreover, the evaluation of the response to NCPAP and HHHFNC could clarify their efficacy as a treatment for RDS in extremely preterm infants. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03548324 . Registered on 7 June 2018.