CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT04323397nHFOnSIPPVUpdated Mar 3, 2025Results posted

Nasal HFOV Versus Nasal SIPPV in Neonate Following Extubation: RCT Crossover Study

An interventional study of Non-invasive ventilation in High-Frequency Ventilation, Intermittent Positive-Pressure Ventilation and Newborn Morbidity, sponsored by Prince of Songkla University. Completed at 1 site in Thailand. Open to participants aged 1 Day to 1 Month. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2025-03-03.

Sponsored by Prince of Songkla University · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
133
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
1 Day to 1 Month
Sex
All
01

Study summary

Mechanical ventilation was introduced to treat respiratory failure in preterm infants or sick neonates then improvements in survival (1,2). However, the complications from short or long term use of ventilation can result in unintended harm or burden (e.g., air leak syndrome, pneumonia, bronchopulmonary dysplasia, neurological injury, retinopathy of prematurity) (3,4). To reduce these risks, clinicians should aggressive extubated neonates as early as possible. Respiratory (focus on blood gas as well as partial pressure CO2 [pCO2]) or extubation (focus on clinical condition as well as reintubation) failure was worrisome in pediatrician and parents if the neonate was reintubated owing to complete recovery of lung disease or inadequate respiratory drive.

Non-invasive ventilation (NIV) was supported for primary respiratory support (initial mode before endotracheal intubation) or post-extubation. Nasal continuous positive airway pressure (nCPAP) was familiar to NIV mode in neonatal respiratory support. Nowadays, the new NIV modalities are nasal intermittent synchronized positive pressure ventilation (nSIPPV) and nasal high frequency oscillation (nHFO). To increase the likelihood of nCPAP success, other new modalities of NIV may be interesting. From theory, nSIPPV and nHFO combines peak inspiratory pressure (PIP) with synchrony and high-frequency oscillations without synchrony above CPAP, respectively. From meta-analysis, nSIPPV and nHFO were statistically significant superior than nCPAP both respiratory and extubation failure in neonate (5,6).

The aim of our study was to investigate the efficacy of nHFOV and nSIPPV for CO2 clearance and reintubation rate after extubated neonates. The investigators hypothesized that nHFOV mode would improve CO2 clearance better than nSIPPV mode.

Read the detailed description

The primary outcome (pCO2) was measured by crossover RCT. The secondary outcome (reintubation within 7 days) was measured by paralleled RCT.

02

Conditions studied

  • High-Frequency Ventilation
  • Intermittent Positive-Pressure Ventilation
  • Newborn Morbidity
  • Noninvasive Ventilation

Keywords

  • Nasal High-Frequency Oscillation
  • Nasal Synchronized Intermittent Positive Pressure
  • Respiratory Failure
  • Extubation Failure
03

In context

Lead sponsor

Prince of Songkla University is the lead sponsor of 112 studies on the registry; 13 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
1 Day to 1 Month
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

  • Born in hospital and admit in NICU
  • The first endotracheal intubation and need NIV if extubation
  • Umbilical arterial catheterization to draw the blood gas
  • Neonate has not been intervened from another RCT study

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Major congenital anomalies or chromosomal abnormalities
  • Neuromuscular diseases
  • Upper respiratory tract abnormalities
  • Suspected congenital lung diseases or pulmonary hypoplasia
  • Need for surgery known before the first extubation
  • Grade IV intraventricular hemorrhage occurring before the first extubation
  • Palliative care
  • Parents' decision not to participate
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Crossover assignment
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
133 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    nasal high frequency oscillatory ventilation

    nHFO: flow 8-10 L/minute, frequency 10 Hz, MAP = "MAP (before extubation) + 2" or "8 (preterm), 10 (term)" cmH2O, dP = "2-3 times of MAP with visible chest oscillations" or 25-35 cmH2O, I:E = 1:1, FiO2 = "FiO2 (before extubation) + 0.1-0.2" keep targeted SpO2 90-94%

    Device: Non-invasive ventilation

  • Experimental
    nasal synchronized intermittent positive pressure ventilation

    nSIPPV: flow 8-10 L/minute, rate 60/minute, PIP = "PIP (before extubation) + 2-5" or "20 (preterm), 25 (term)" cmH2O, PEEP = 5 cmH2O, IT = 0.5 s, FiO2 = "FiO2 (before extubation) + 0.1-0.2" keep targeted SpO2 90-94%. The highest trigger sensitivity avoiding auto triggering was selected.

    Device: Non-invasive ventilation

Interventions

  • DeviceNon-invasive ventilation

    Intervention nasal high frequency oscillatory ventilation (nHFOV) and nasal synchronized intermittent positive pressure ventilation (nSIPPV) were generated by neonatal ventilators (SLE6000 infant ventilators, United Kingdom) using bi-nasal prongs (RAM cannula, NEOTECH®, USA) or the nasal mask of the same type for both ventilation modes. The size of the prongs was determined by the infant's weight. The largest possible prongs were used, with a snug fit to avoid leakage. Pacifier for preterm and term neonate (Jollypop™, USA) was taken to avoid leakage from the mouth. The disposable ventilator circuit (Fisher \& Paykel RT268™, Evaqua Dual Limb Infant Breathing Circuit Kit with Evaqua 2 Technology and Pressure Line, Flow \> 4L/min, New Zealand) was used. The initial NIV setting was (7) described in arm description. (above)

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Partial Pressure CO2 (pCO2) : Data From the Crossover Phase of the Study

    Data from the Crossover Phase of the study: After randomization only in neonate with arterial line, the initial non-invasive ventilation (NIV) was started then blood gas was obtained after 2 hours. The participant was switched to another NIV and blood gas was obtained after 2 hours.

    Time frame: 2 hours after each intervention

Secondary outcomes

  1. Number of Participants With Extubation Failure: Data From the Parallel Phase of the Study.

    Data from the Parallel Phase of the study: The participant with and without arterial line was randomized. If The participant with arterial line was randomized to cross-over trial (randomized to NIV, then switched to another NIV for 2 hours, then switched to the first NIV \[parallel trial\]). If The participant without arterial line was randomized to parallel trial. Extubation failure will be defined by reintubation after NIV mode.

    Time frame: up to 7 days after each intervention

07

Results

Posted Mar 3, 2025

Participant flow

Overall, 203 neonates were assessed for eligibility

First Intervention
Participant flow — First Intervention
Milestone"nHFO First, Then nSIPPV, Then nHFO""nSIPPV First, Then nHFOV, Then nSIPPV"
Started5151
Completed5151
Not completed00
Second Intervention
Participant flow — Second Intervention
Milestone"nHFO First, Then nSIPPV, Then nHFO""nSIPPV First, Then nHFOV, Then nSIPPV"
Started5151
Completed5151
Not completed00
Third Intervention
Participant flow — Third Intervention
Milestone"nHFO First, Then nSIPPV, Then nHFO""nSIPPV First, Then nHFOV, Then nSIPPV"
Started6766
Completed6766
Not completed00

Outcome measures

PrimaryPartial Pressure CO2 (pCO2) : Data From the Crossover Phase of the Study

Data from the Crossover Phase of the study: After randomization only in neonate with arterial line, the initial non-invasive ventilation (NIV) was started then blood gas was obtained after 2 hours. The participant was switched to another NIV and blood gas was obtained after 2 hours.

Time frame:
2 hours after each intervention
Reported as:
Mean · mm Hg
Partial Pressure CO2 (pCO2) : Data From the Crossover Phase of the Study
mm HgnHFOnSIPPV
Partial Pressure CO2 (pCO2) : Data From the Crossover Phase of the Study38.7 ± 8.836.8 ± 10.2
SecondaryNumber of Participants With Extubation Failure: Data From the Parallel Phase of the Study.

Data from the Parallel Phase of the study: The participant with and without arterial line was randomized. If The participant with arterial line was randomized to cross-over trial (randomized to NIV, then switched to another NIV for 2 hours, then switched to the first NIV \[parallel trial\]). If The participant without arterial line was randomized to parallel trial. Extubation failure will be defined by reintubation after NIV mode.

Time frame:
up to 7 days after each intervention
Reported as:
Count of participants · Participants
Number of Participants With Extubation Failure: Data From the Parallel Phase of the Study.
ParticipantsnHFOnSIPPV
Number of Participants With Extubation Failure: Data From the Parallel Phase of the Study.54

Adverse events

Collected over Adverse event: "Crossover Phase: up to 4 hours, Parallel Phase: up to 7 days after intervention". Non-serious events are listed at a 0% frequency threshold.

Adverse event summary by group
GroupDeathsSeriousOther
Parallel: Nasal High Frequency Oscillatory Ventilation0/67 (0%)5/67 (7.5%)0/67 (0%)
Parallel: Nasal Synchronized Intermittent Positive Pressure Ventilation0/66 (0%)4/66 (6.1%)0/66 (0%)
Crossover: Nasal High Frequency Oscillatory Ventilation0/102 (0%)0/102 (0%)0/102 (0%)
Crossover: Nasal Synchronized Intermittent Positive Pressure Ventilation0/102 (0%)1/102 (1%)0/102 (0%)
Most frequent serious events
Most frequent serious events
EventParallel: Nasal High Frequency Oscillatory VentilationParallel: Nasal Synchronized Intermittent Positive Pressure VentilationCrossover: Nasal High Frequency Oscillatory VentilationCrossover: Nasal Synchronized Intermittent Positive Pressure Ventilation
Adverse Event after started interventionRespiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders5/674/660/1021/102

Baseline characteristics

Age, Continuous
Age, Continuous(weeks)nHFOV, Then nSIPPV, Then nHFOVnSIPPV, Then nHFOV, Then nSIPPVTotal
Median33 (30 to 35)33 (30 to 37)33 (30 to 37)
Sex: Female, Male
Sex: Female, Male(Participants)nHFOV, Then nSIPPV, Then nHFOVnSIPPV, Then nHFOV, Then nSIPPVTotal
Female203252
Male473481
Race and Ethnicity Not Collected
Race and Ethnicity Not Collected(Participants)nHFOV, Then nSIPPV, Then nHFOVnSIPPV, Then nHFOV, Then nSIPPVTotal
Count of participants——0
Duration of invasive ventilation
Duration of invasive ventilation(hours)nHFOV, Then nSIPPV, Then nHFOVnSIPPV, Then nHFOV, Then nSIPPVTotal
Median63.4 (21.2 to 95.2)42.9 (21.7 to 84.1)48.4 (21.3 to 90.8)
08

Study locations

1 site
  • Songklanagarind Hospital, Prince of Songkla University
    Hat-Yai, Songkhla 90110, Thailand
09

References and documents

Publications

  • Baingam K, Phatigomet M, Thatrimontrichai A, Maneenil G, Dissaneevate S, Janjindamai W. Carbon Dioxide Level between Nasal High-Frequency Oscillatory Ventilation and Synchronized Nasal Intermittent Positive Pressure Ventilation after Extubation in Neonates: A Cross-over Randomized Controlled Trial. Am J Perinatol. 2024 Aug;41(11):1495-1503. doi: 10.1055/a-2113-3284. Epub 2023 Jun 20. PubMed 37339671 ↗
  • Phatigomet M, Thatrimontrichai A, Maneenil G, Dissaneevate S, Janjindamai W. Reintubation Rate between Nasal High-Frequency Oscillatory Ventilation versus Synchronized Nasal Intermittent Positive Pressure Ventilation in Neonates: A Parallel Randomized Controlled Trial. Am J Perinatol. 2024 Aug;41(11):1504-1511. doi: 10.1055/a-2118-5351. Epub 2023 Jun 27. PubMed 37369239 ↗
  • Baingam K, Phatigomet M, Thatrimontrichai A, Maneenil G, Dissaneevate S, Janjindamai W. Erratum: Carbon Dioxide Level between Nasal High-Frequency Oscillatory Ventilation and Synchronized Nasal Intermittent Positive Pressure Ventilation after Extubation in Neonates: A Cross-over Randomized Controlled Trial. Am J Perinatol. 2024 Aug;41(11):e1. doi: 10.1055/s-0044-1778715. Epub 2024 Jan 24. No abstract available. PubMed 38266755 ↗
  • Phatigomet M, Thatrimontrichai A, Maneenil G, Dissaneevate S, Janjindamai W. Erratum: Reintubation Rate between Nasal High-Frequency Oscillatory Ventilation versus Synchronized Nasal Intermittent Positive Pressure Ventilation in Neonates: A Parallel Randomized Controlled Trial. Am J Perinatol. 2024 Aug;41(11):e2. doi: 10.1055/s-0044-1778714. Epub 2024 Jan 24. No abstract available. PubMed 38266756 ↗

Study documents

  • Protocol and statistical analysis plan · Oct 15, 2019

Documents are hosted by the registry — open the source record to download them.

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

10

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Mar 3, 2025, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
11

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT04323397
Lead sponsor
Prince of Songkla University
Responsible party
Anucha Thatrimontrichai (Principal Investigator, Prince of Songkla University) — Principal investigator
First posted
Mar 26, 2020
Start date
Jul 1, 2020
Primary completion
Jun 30, 2022
Completion
Aug 1, 2022
Results posted
Mar 3, 2025
Last update
Mar 3, 2025

Study contacts

Anucha Thatrimontrichai, M.D.
principal investigator · Prince of Songkla University

Oversight

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

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Feb 2025. 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