OBJECTIVE: To compare non-invasive ventilation neurally adjusted ventilatory assist (NIV-NAVA) and non-invasive pressure support (NIV-PS) in preterm infants on patient-ventilator synchrony. DESIGN: A randomised phase II crossover trial. SETTING:Neonatal intensive care units of two tertiary university hospitals in Korea. PATIENTS: Preterm infants born <32 weeks. INTERVENTION: NIV-NAVA and NIV-PS were applied in random order after ventilator weaning. Data were recorded for sequential 5 min periods after 10 min applications of each mode. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The electrical activity of the diaphragm (Edi), ventilator flow and pressure curves were compared to examine the trigger delay (primary outcome) and other parameters of patient-ventilator interaction (secondary outcomes) for each period. RESULTS:Fifteen infants completed the protocol. Trigger delay (35.2±8.3 vs 294.6±101.9 ms, p<0.001), ventilator inspiratory time (423.3±87.1 vs 534.0±165.5 ms, p=0.009) and inspiratory time in excess (32.3±8.3% vs 294.6±101.9%, p=0.001) were lower during NIV-NAVA compared with NIV-PS. Maximum Edi (12.6±6.3 vs 16.6±8.7 μV, p=0.003), swing Edi (8.8±4.8 vs 12.2±8.7 μV, p=0.012) and peak inspiratory pressure (12.3±1.5 vs 14.7±2.7 cm H2O, p=0.003) were also lower during NIV-NAVA. The main asynchrony events during NIV-PS were ineffective efforts and autotriggering. All types of asynchronies except double triggering were reduced with NIV-NAVA. Asynchrony index was significantly lower during NIV-NAVA compared with NIV-PS (p<0.001). No significant differences in leakage, expiratory tidal volume or minute ventilation were observed, but the respiratory rate was lower during NIV-PS than during NIV-NAVA. CONCLUSIONS:NAVA improved patient-ventilator synchrony and diaphragmatic unloading in preterm infants during non-invasive nasal ventilation even in the presence of large air leaks. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Registered with http://www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01877720). Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To compare non-invasive ventilation neurally adjusted ventilatory assist (NIV-NAVA) and non-invasive pressure support (NIV-PS) in preterm infants on patient-ventilator synchrony. DESIGN: A randomised phase II crossover trial. SETTING: Neonatal intensive care units of two tertiary university hospitals in Korea. PATIENTS: Preterm infants born <32 weeks. INTERVENTION: NIV-NAVA and NIV-PS were applied in random order after ventilator weaning. Data were recorded for sequential 5 min periods after 10 min applications of each mode. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The electrical activity of the diaphragm (Edi), ventilator flow and pressure curves were compared to examine the trigger delay (primary outcome) and other parameters of patient-ventilator interaction (secondary outcomes) for each period. RESULTS: Fifteen infants completed the protocol. Trigger delay (35.2±8.3 vs 294.6±101.9 ms, p<0.001), ventilator inspiratory time (423.3±87.1 vs 534.0±165.5 ms, p=0.009) and inspiratory time in excess (32.3±8.3% vs 294.6±101.9%, p=0.001) were lower during NIV-NAVA compared with NIV-PS. Maximum Edi (12.6±6.3 vs 16.6±8.7 μV, p=0.003), swing Edi (8.8±4.8 vs 12.2±8.7 μV, p=0.012) and peak inspiratory pressure (12.3±1.5 vs 14.7±2.7 cm H2O, p=0.003) were also lower during NIV-NAVA. The main asynchrony events during NIV-PS were ineffective efforts and autotriggering. All types of asynchronies except double triggering were reduced with NIV-NAVA. Asynchrony index was significantly lower during NIV-NAVA compared with NIV-PS (p<0.001). No significant differences in leakage, expiratory tidal volume or minute ventilation were observed, but the respiratory rate was lower during NIV-PS than during NIV-NAVA. CONCLUSIONS:NAVA improved patient-ventilator synchrony and diaphragmatic unloading in preterm infants during non-invasive nasal ventilation even in the presence of large air leaks. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Registered with http://www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01877720). Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.
Authors: Leeann R Pavlek; Brian K Rivera; Charles V Smith; Joanie Randle; Cory Hanlon; Kristi Small; Edward F Bell; Matthew A Rysavy; Sara Conroy; Carl H Backes Journal: J Pediatr Date: 2021-04-21 Impact factor: 6.314
Authors: Blanca Toledo Del Castillo; Isabel Gordillo; Elena Rubio García; Sarah Nicole Fernández Lafever; Rafael Gonzalez Cortés; Javier Urbano Villaescusa; Jorge López González; María José Solana García; Jesús López-Herce Cid Journal: BMC Pulm Med Date: 2016-11-03 Impact factor: 3.317
Authors: Christopher K Gibu; Phillip Y Cheng; Raymond J Ward; Benjamin Castro; Gregory P Heldt Journal: Pediatr Res Date: 2017-07-12 Impact factor: 3.756