Effect of Nasal Continuous Positive Airway Pressure vs Heated Humidified High-Flow Nasal Cannula on Feeding Intolerance in Preterm Infants With Respiratory Distress Syndrome: The ENTARES Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Respiratory distress syndrome and feeding intolerance are common conditions that are often associated with preterm infants. Showing similar efficacy, nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP) and heated humidified high-flow nasal cannula (HHHFNC) are the most widespread noninvasive respiratory support (NRS) in neonatal intensive care units, but their effect on feeding intolerance is unknown. Objective: To evaluate the effect of NCPAP vs HHHFNC on high-risk preterm infants with respiratory distress syndrome. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter randomized clinical trial involved infants who were born in 1 of 13 neonatal intensive care units in Italy between November 1, 2018, and June 30, 2021. Preterm infants with a gestational age of 25 to 29 weeks, who were suitable for enteral feeding and who proved to be medically stable on NRS for at least 48 hours were enrolled in the study within the first week of life and randomized to receive either NCPAP or HHHFNC. Statistical analysis was performed according to the intention-to-treat approach. Intervention: NCPAP or HHHFNC. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the time to full enteral feeding (FEF), defined as an enteral intake of 150 mL/kg per day. Secondary outcomes were the median daily increment of enteral feeding, signs of feeding intolerance, effectiveness of the assigned NRS, peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO2)-fraction of inspired oxygen (FIO2) ratio at changes of NRS, and growth. Results: Two-hundred forty-seven infants (median [IQR] gestational age, 28 [27-29] weeks; 130 girls [52.6%]) were randomized to the NCPAP group (n = 122) or the HHHFNC group (n = 125). There were no differences in the primary and secondary nutritional outcomes between the 2 groups. The median time to reach FEF was 14 days (95% CI, 11-15 days) in the NCPAP group and 14 days (95% CI, 12-18 days) in the HHHFNC group, and similar results were observed in the subgroup of infants with less than 28 weeks' gestation. On the first NRS change, higher SpO2-FIO2 ratio (median [IQR], 4.6 [4.1-4.7] vs 3.7 [3.2-4.0]; P < .001) and lower rate of ineffectiveness (1 [4.8%] vs 17 [73.9%]; P < .001) were observed in the NCPAP vs HHHFNC group. Conclusions and relevance: This randomized clinical trial found that NCPAP and HHHFNC had similar effects on feeding intolerance, despite different working mechanisms. Clinicians may tailor respiratory care by selecting and switching between the 2 NRS techniques on the basis of respiratory effectiveness and patient compliance, without affecting feeding intolerance. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03548324.

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.