ClinicalTrials.Veeva

Menu

Non-invasive Neurally Adjusted Ventilatory Assist Versus Nasal Intermittent Positive Pressure Ventilation for Preterm Infants After Extubation

K

King Fahad Armed Forces Hospital

Status

Completed

Conditions

Prematurity
Respiratory Failure
Ventilator Lung; Newborn

Treatments

Device: NIPPV
Device: NI-NAVA

Study type

Interventional

Funder types

Other

Identifiers

NCT03388437
REC 202

Details and patient eligibility

About

Non-invasive respiratory support has been emerging in the management of respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) in preterm infants to minimise the risk of lung injury. Intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) provides a method of augmenting continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) by delivering ventilator breaths via nasal prongs.It may increase tidal volume, improve gas exchange and reduce work of breathing. However, NIPPV may associate with patient-ventilator asynchrony that can cause poor tolerance and risk of intubation. It may also in increased risk of pneumothorax and bowel perforation because of increase in intrathoracic pressure.

On the other hand, neurally adjusted ventilatory assist (NAVA) is a newer mode of ventilation, which has the potential to overcome these challenges. It uses the electrical activity of the diaphragm (EAdi) as a signal to synchronise the mechanical ventilatory breaths and deliver an inspiratory pressure based on this electrical activity. Comparing NI-NAVA and NIPPV in preterm infants, has shown that NI-NAVA improved the synchronization between patient and ventilator and decreased diaphragm work of breathing .

There is lack of data on the use of NI-NAVA in neonates post extubation in the literature. To date, no study has focused on short-term impacts. Therefore, it is important to evaluate the need of additional ventilatory support post extubation of NI-NAVA and NIPPV and also the risk of developing adverse outcomes.

Aim:

The aim is to compare NI-NAVA & NIPPV in terms of extubation failure in infants< 32 weeks gestation.

Hypothesis:

Investigators hypothesized that infants born prematurely < 32 weeks gestation who extubated to NI-NAVA have a lower risk of extubation failure and need of additional ventilatory support.

Full description

Study Design: Randomised controlled trial

Study Setting: single center NICU level III, KFAFH tertiary care center , Jeddah Saudi Arabia

Enrollment

36 patients

Sex

All

Ages

Under 2 weeks old

Volunteers

No Healthy Volunteers

Inclusion criteria

  1. Born less than 32 weeks gestation with respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) and requiring endotracheal tube and mechanical ventilation.
  2. Less than two weeks old
  3. First extubation attempt
  4. CRIB score 0-5
  5. Written-informed parental consent for the study

Exclusion criteria

  1. Major congenital malformations or respiratory abnormalities
  2. Neuromuscular disease
  3. phrenic nerve palsy
  4. Intraventricular hemorrhage (IVH) grade III or IV
  5. Absence of informed consent
  6. Out born infants

Trial design

Primary purpose

Treatment

Allocation

Randomized

Interventional model

Parallel Assignment

Masking

None (Open label)

36 participants in 2 patient groups

NI-NAVA
Experimental group
Description:
Initial setting; NAVA level of 2; PEEP of 5-6 cm H 2 O, apnea time 5-10 seconds, target Edi maximum between 10-15 and minimum \< 5 for 72 hours post extubation
Treatment:
Device: NI-NAVA
NIPPV
Active Comparator group
Description:
Initial setting; PIP can be increased by 2 cm H 2 O from the pre-extubation PEEP of 5-6 cm for 72 hours post extubation
Treatment:
Device: NIPPV

Trial documents
1

Trial contacts and locations

1

Loading...

Data sourced from clinicaltrials.gov

Clinical trials

Find clinical trialsTrials by location
© Copyright 2026 Veeva Systems