Humidified High Flow Nasal Cannula as Compared to Nasal Continuous Positive Airway Pressure

NCT ID: NCT00356668

Last Updated: 2015-07-14

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Clinical Phase

PHASE3

Total Enrollment

16 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2006-07-31

Study Completion Date

2007-09-30

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

The specific aims of this study are to evaluate the amount of high flow nasal cannula (HFNC) gas flow required to generate an equivalent positive distending pressure as that provided by nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP) of 6 cm H2O, assess the relationships between positive distending pressure, gas flow, oxygen requirement, and patient weight, and lastly, develop an appropriate protocol to be used in the NICU for transitioning patients from NCPAP to an equivalent amount of HFNC.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

In the face of exogenous surfactant and use of antenatal steroids, respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in premature infants. RDS is the result of a series of complex, interrelated events, including atelectasis, ventilation-perfusion mismatching, and lung inflammation/injury (1). The cascade of events which typifies RDS and its long-term counterpart, chronic lung disease (CLD), is rooted in the intrinsic deficits of the premature lung as well as exacerbated by mechanical ventilation, a mainstay of therapy. For this reason, scientists and clinicians alike continue to search for treatment modalities which will not only treat RDS but also decrease the incidence of chronic lung disease.

The use of non-invasive ventilatory strategies, such as nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP), in the treatment of RDS is thought to provide positive distending pressure while minimize lung inflammation and injury associated with mechanical ventilation (2). Avoidance of intubation and increased use of NCPAP to treat respiratory distress syndrome has been shown to decrease the incidence of chronic lung disease (3,4). However, NCPAP does have some common clinical limitations. First, the administration of NCPAP has inherent mechanical difficulties in appropriately maintaining the nasal prong apparatus within the small neonatal nose. Secondly, the nasal prongs used to deliver NCPAP can cause nasal septal trauma. Lastly, some premature infants do not tolerate the NCPAP apparatus which must be tightly affixed to their nose and face. This intolerance is often demonstrated by increased patient movement, and subsequently, the risk of mechanical difficulties and septal trauma increase during these times. Although NCPAP continues to be used in most neonatal intensive care units (NICUs), due to its aforementioned drawbacks, we continue to look for other effective, non-invasive modes of ventilation to provide support to premature infants with respiratory distress.

Humidified high flow nasal cannula (HFNC) has recently been introduced into neonatal respiratory care as a means of providing positive distending pressure to the neonate with respiratory distress. HFNC aims to maximize patient tolerance by employing heated, humidified gas flow through the standard neonatal nasal cannula that is used routinely in neonatal intensive care units. HFNC provides positive distending pressure by using high gas flow (\>1 liter per minute) (5). Although numerous neonatal intensive care units are using HFNC, including both NICUs at Children's Hospitals of Minnesota, there are very few studies regarding its use in this population. Anecdotally, the premature babies tolerate the administration of HFNC quite well. However, like any new therapy, there are many unknowns.

There is only one study to date which investigates HFNC versus NCPAP in the preterm neonate (6). Sreenan and colleagues found HFNC to be as effective as NCPAP in the management of apnea of prematurity and also demonstrated that the positive distending pressure provided by HFNC varied with the patient's weight. Sreenan's study as well as preliminary data presented in abstract form cite HFNC use with various amounts of gas flow, ranging from 1 liter per minute up to 6 liters per minute (6,7,8). The choice of how much gas flow to use with the HFNC system is unclear. This decision is actually a three-fold question: 1) the initial amount of liter flow to use, 2) what does a particular liter flow provide for positive distending pressure to that patient, and 3) are these values system-specific? We aim to evaluate these questions in our study. Until recently, NCPAP has been the mainstay of non-invasive ventilatory support for premature babies. However, as HFNC is better tolerated and uses a nasal cannula that is less prone to mechanical mishaps than NCPAP, it is clear that we need more information to accurately treat babies with HFNC. The results of this study will help guide the use of HFNC in preterm babies with respiratory insufficiency, as knowledge of the positive distending pressures derived from the HFNC system are crucial in minimizing barotrauma to the fragile, premature lung.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Respiratory Distress Syndrome Cronic Lung Disease

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

NON_RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

CROSSOVER

Primary Study Purpose

TREATMENT

Blinding Strategy

NONE

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

High Flow Nasal Cannula

30 minute blocks on varying flows of high flow nasal cannula

Intervention Type DEVICE

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* 1\) receiving NCPAP ventilatory support at \> 72 hrs. of age and 2) requiring FiO2 21-50% on NCPAP.

Exclusion Criteria

* FiO2 \>50%, presence of pneumothorax or pleural effusion, anatomical abnormalities of the airway, lungs, or esophagus, or cyanotic congenital heart defect.
Minimum Eligible Age

72 Hours

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

Children's Hospitals and Clinics of Minnesota

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Principal Investigators

Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.

Mark C Mammel, MD

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Children's Hospital and Clinics of Minnesota

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

Children's Hospital and Clinics of Minnesota

Minneapolis, Minnesota, United States

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

United States

References

Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.

Fanaroff & Martin, Ch. 42, pg.1003

Reference Type BACKGROUND

Jobe AH, Kramer BW, Moss TJ, Newnham JP, Ikegami M. Decreased indicators of lung injury with continuous positive expiratory pressure in preterm lambs. Pediatr Res. 2002 Sep;52(3):387-92. doi: 10.1203/00006450-200209000-00014.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 12193673 (View on PubMed)

Lindner W, Vossbeck S, Hummler H, Pohlandt F. Delivery room management of extremely low birth weight infants: spontaneous breathing or intubation? Pediatrics. 1999 May;103(5 Pt 1):961-7. doi: 10.1542/peds.103.5.961.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 10224173 (View on PubMed)

Gittermann MK, Fusch C, Gittermann AR, Regazzoni BM, Moessinger AC. Early nasal continuous positive airway pressure treatment reduces the need for intubation in very low birth weight infants. Eur J Pediatr. 1997 May;156(5):384-8. doi: 10.1007/s004310050620.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 9177982 (View on PubMed)

Locke RG, Wolfson MR, Shaffer TH, Rubenstein SD, Greenspan JS. Inadvertent administration of positive end-distending pressure during nasal cannula flow. Pediatrics. 1993 Jan;91(1):135-8.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 8416477 (View on PubMed)

Sreenan C, Lemke RP, Hudson-Mason A, Osiovich H. High-flow nasal cannulae in the management of apnea of prematurity: a comparison with conventional nasal continuous positive airway pressure. Pediatrics. 2001 May;107(5):1081-3. doi: 10.1542/peds.107.5.1081.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 11331690 (View on PubMed)

Ramanathan A, Cayabyab R, et al. High flow nasal cannula use in preterm and term newborns admitted to neonatal intensive care unit: a prospective, observational study. Pediatr Acad Soc 2005; 57:3417

Reference Type BACKGROUND

Chang GY, Cox CA, Shaffer TH. Nasal cannula, CPAP, and high-flow nasal cannula: effect of flow on temperature, humidity, pressure, and resistance. Biomed Instrum Technol. 2011 Jan-Feb;45(1):69-74. doi: 10.2345/0899-8205-45.1.69.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 21322815 (View on PubMed)

Lampland AL, Plumm B, Meyers PA, Worwa CT, Mammel MC. Observational study of humidified high-flow nasal cannula compared with nasal continuous positive airway pressure. J Pediatr. 2009 Feb;154(2):177-82. doi: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2008.07.021. Epub 2008 Aug 30.

Reference Type DERIVED
PMID: 18760803 (View on PubMed)

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

0606-051

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.

HFNC vs Two Nare HFNC in Extubated Patients
NCT06398951 ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING NA