CClinicalTrials.gg
Not yet recruitingNCT03171129Updated Jan 30, 2026

ADINA vs. High Flow Nasal Cannula Comparison Study

An interventional study of Adaptive Dynamic Inspiratory Nasal Apparatus and High flow Nasal Canula in Respiratory Distress Neonatal, sponsored by Loma Linda University. Not yet recruiting at 1 site in United States. Open to participants aged 23 Weeks to 40 Weeks. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-01-30.

Sponsored by Loma Linda University · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
40
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
23 Weeks to 40 Weeks
Sex
All
01

Study summary

This study is to evaluate the feasibility of using a pressure limited nasal cannula system instead of a high flow nasal cannula system in the management of premature babies with respiratory distress.

Read the detailed description

NCPAP has been used increasingly to manage respiratory distress in newborns as well as apnea of prematurity. Humidified high flow nasal cannula devices (flows 1-8 lpm) have also been used in neonatal intensive care units.

This study is to evaluate the feasibility of using a pressure limited nasal cannula system instead of a high flow nasal cannula system in the management of premature babies with respiratory distress.

02

Conditions studied

  • Respiratory Distress Neonatal

Keywords

  • Respiratory Distress
  • Nasal CPAP
  • high flow nasal canula
03

Who can participate

Ages eligible
23 Weeks to 40 Weeks
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

  • Neonates admitted to NICU
  • Weights of 400-500 grams
  • Requiring oxygen greater than 30%
  • No evidence of focal lobar consolidation in lung fields

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Intolerance to procedure
  • gelatinous skin
  • known allergy to adhesive material
  • interference with therapy
  • profound sepsis
  • pneumonia
  • unmanaged apnea/bradycardia
  • known or suspect complex congenital heart disease
  • severe cleft lip or palate
  • suspect or proven lethal congenital anomaly
  • intolerance to the interface used in the devices
  • inability to secure an appropriate fit of the patient nasal interface
  • considered non-viable or of uncertain viability
  • parental refusal.
04

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
40 participants (estimated)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    High flow nasal cannula system w/ ADINA

    The intervention is the insertion of the the ADINA device into the high flow nasal cannula system. ADINA will be placed according to weight class recommendations to increase the positive end expiratory pressure (PEEP). ADINA is actually a combination of the Neotech RAM Cannula and a clear Regulator/Pop off valve.

    Device: Adaptive Dynamic Inspiratory Nasal Apparatus

  • Active comparator
    high flow nasal cannula system

    High flow nasal cannula will deliver oxygen at 2-4 lpm of flow. High flow cannula are used to provide the control interface.

    Device: High flow Nasal Canula

Interventions

  • DeviceAdaptive Dynamic Inspiratory Nasal Apparatus

    Oxygen will be administered via ADINA

    Also known as: ADINA

  • DeviceHigh flow Nasal Canula

    Oxygen will be administered via nasal canula

05

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Duration of Oxygen Use

    The length of time the patient is on oxygen will be measured in hours.

    Time frame: From time of randomization until time of discharge from the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU) up to 100 days.

Secondary outcomes

  1. Oxygen Concentration

    ADINA will provide a concentration of oxygen between 1.5 and 4 liters which is equivalent to that provided by the conventional nasal cannula. This will be measured every twelve hours by NICU staff.

    Time frame: From time of randomization until time of discharge from NICU up to 100 days.

  2. Number of Participants with treatment-related pneumothorax

    Participants will be monitored for pneumothorax occurrence while on ADINA and/or high flow nasal cannula. The incidence of pneumothorax occurrence in each Arm will be collected for comparison.

    Time frame: From time of randomization until time of discharge from NICU up to 100 days.

  3. Number of Participants with Excoriation at Nasal Site

    Participants will be monitored for excoriation at the nasal site while on ADINA and/or high flow nasal cannula. The incidence of excoriation at the nasal site in each Arm will be collected for comparison.

    Time frame: From time of randomization until time of discharge from NICU up to 100 days.

06

Study locations

1 site
  • Loma Linda University Medical Center
    Loma Linda, California 92354, United States
07

References and documents

Publications

  • Gregory GA, Kitterman JA, Phibbs RH, Tooley WH, Hamilton WK. Treatment of the idiopathic respiratory-distress syndrome with continuous positive airway pressure. N Engl J Med. 1971 Jun 17;284(24):1333-40. doi: 10.1056/NEJM197106172842401. No abstract available. PubMed 4930602 ↗
  • Dutta S. High-flow nasal cannula versus nasal continuous positive airway pressure in the management of apnea of prematurity. Pediatrics. 2002 Apr;109(4):718-9; author reply 718-9. doi: 10.1542/peds.109.4.718. No abstract available. PubMed 11927724 ↗
  • Campbell DM, Shah PS, Shah V, Kelly EN. Nasal continuous positive airway pressure from high flow cannula versus Infant Flow for Preterm infants. J Perinatol. 2006 Sep;26(9):546-9. doi: 10.1038/sj.jp.7211561. Epub 2006 Jul 13. PubMed 16837929 ↗
  • Kubicka ZJ, Limauro J, Darnall RA. Heated, humidified high-flow nasal cannula therapy: yet another way to deliver continuous positive airway pressure? Pediatrics. 2008 Jan;121(1):82-8. doi: 10.1542/peds.2007-0957. PubMed 18166560 ↗
  • Woodhead DD, Lambert DK, Clark JM, Christensen RD. Comparing two methods of delivering high-flow gas therapy by nasal cannula following endotracheal extubation: a prospective, randomized, masked, crossover trial. J Perinatol. 2006 Aug;26(8):481-5. doi: 10.1038/sj.jp.7211543. Epub 2006 May 25. PubMed 16724119 ↗
  • Shoemaker MT, Pierce MR, Yoder BA, DiGeronimo RJ. High flow nasal cannula versus nasal CPAP for neonatal respiratory disease: a retrospective study. J Perinatol. 2007 Feb;27(2):85-91. doi: 10.1038/sj.jp.7211647. PubMed 17262040 ↗
  • 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. PubMed 11331690 ↗
  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Update: Ralstonia species associated with Vapotherm oxygen delivery devices--United States, 2005. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2005 Nov 4;54(43):1104-5. PubMed 16267498 ↗
  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Ralstonia associated with Vapotherm oxygen delivery device--United States, 2005. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2005 Oct 21;54(41):1052-3. PubMed 16237377 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

08

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT03171129
Lead sponsor
Loma Linda University
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
May 31, 2017
Start date
Jul 2026 (estimated)
Primary completion
Sep 2027 (estimated)
Completion
Sep 2027 (estimated)
Last update
Jan 30, 2026

Study contacts

Tina Ramirez
Contact
TIRameriz@llu.edu
909-558-5828
Alyssa Taber
Contact
ATaber@llu.edu
909-558-6087
Mitchell R Goldstein, MD
principal investigator · Loma Linda University Health

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
Yes
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is not yet recruiting, as verified in Jan 2026. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion