Newborn Respiratory DistressSyncNIVNCT03289936
Short Term Effects of Synchronized vs. Non-synchronized NIPPV in Preterm Infants.
A study testing NIPPV and SNIPPV in people with Newborn Respiratory Distress and Preterm Infant, run by University of Turin, Italy at 1 site in Italy.
Trial summary
Comparing the cardio-respiratory adaptation and differences to non invasive ventilation techniques, nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) non synchronized vs synchronized (SNIPPV) in preterm newborns (gestational age at birth < 32 weeks) at their first approach to non invasive ventilation as first… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages Up to 32 weeks
- Conditions the study is for
- Newborn Respiratory Distress, Preterm Infant
- What is being tested?
- NIPPV and SNIPPV
- Type of treatment
- Medical device
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 30 participants
- Where
- 1 siteItaly
- Study dates
- 16 Nov 2020to 31 Dec 2024
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages Up to 32 weeks
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Child
Who may be able to join
- Gestational age at birth <32 weeks
- First approach to NIV ventilation (primary or after extubation)
- Parent's informed consent
Who cannot join
- Neurological (including IVH > 2° grade) or surgical diseases
- Sepsis (clinical or laboratory confirmed)
- Chromosomal or genetic abnormalities
- Major malformations and congenital anomalies
- Cardiac problems (including hemodynamically significant PDA)
- Contraindication to NIV (i.e. nasal trauma and gastrointestinal surgery within the previous 7 days).
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Short Term Effects of Synchronized vs. Non-synchronized NIPPV in Preterm Infants: Study Protocol for an Unmasked Randomized Crossover Trial.
Comparing the cardio-respiratory adaptation and differences to non invasive ventilation techniques, nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) non synchronized vs synchronized (SNIPPV) in preterm newborns (gestational age at birth < 32 weeks) at their first approach to non invasive ventilation as first intention (soon after birth) or after extubation.
Read the detailed description
Respiratory problems are one of the major issues to deal with in preterm newborns.
Because of the immaturity of respiratory mechanisms and structures, the use of supporting devices is often necessary. These include both conventional mechanical ventilation (MV) techniques, which require the use of an endotracheal tube, as well as non-invasive ventilation (NIV) techniques that use softer ventilator-patient interfaces. Increasing attention is payed to the latter ones as less aggressive and associated with better outcomes both in terms of mortality and short and long-term complications, such as bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD).
Nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) is a NIV technique in which newborn airways are kept open between two pressure levels: peak inspiratory pressure (PIP) and positive end expiratory pressure (PEEP). The frequency and duration of each phase are defined by setting the inspiratory and expiratory times or the ventilation rate.
This technique has already shown its superiority in terms of reduced duration of MV, reduced necessity of intubation, decreased failure of extubating and reduced prevalence of BPD if compared with non-invasive techniques based on continuous pressure support, such as continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP). Recent meta-analyses of studies where NIPPV has been used as an alternative to CPAP following extubation show that it reduces need for re-ventilation and air leaks but without any reduction in BPD: there is insufficient evidence to recommend NIPPV as primary mode of respiratory support in the delivery room.
It should be specified that the ventilation rate on NIPPV does not reflect the real respiratory rate (RR) of the newborn, as the ventilator supplies the PIP regardless of newborn respiratory efforts. To reproduce a more physiological and gentle ventilation new devices able to detect newborn respiratory efforts and consequently supply a PIP have been developed to synchronize the ventilation rate with RR of the newborn.
The devices used for synchronization can identify newborn respiratory effort by detecting variation in flow or pressure. While in MV the exact beginning of inspiration can be detected through a continuous monitoring of pressure or through the precise interception of inspiratory and expiratory flow some difficulties occur in NIV where, as a consequence of the impossibility to detect expiratory flow, the moment of the exact beginning of spontaneous inspiration is hard to identify.
Recently, a new type of NIV ventilator equipped with a pressure sensor has been put on the market. The software of this ventilator is able to calculate the flow according to the pressure variations of the circuit and to capture the flow variations induced by spontaneous breathing allowing a synchronization of the flow with the patient's respiratory acts.
The use of a synchronized NIV technique would allow a more physiological respiratory support, reducing respiratory fatigue and improving newborn compliance. Despite these premises, the diffusion of synchronized NIPPV in neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) and works on its efficacy are limited.
Some authors have already demonstrated the benefits of using a synchronized NIV technique in terms of extubating success rate, BPD prevalence and mortality and neurocognitive development. Synchronized NIPPV (SNIPPV) seems more effective than NIPPV and NCPAP in reducing need for intubation in respiratory distress syndrome (RDS), in improving the success of extubation and in treating apnea of prematurity, with a reassuring absence of relevant side effects. Synchronised NIPPV delivered through a ventilator can reduce extubation failure but may not confer long-term advantages such as reduction in BPD. Other reported advantageous aspects of SNIPPV include improved thoraco-abdominal synchrony, reduced work of breathing (WOB) and reduced need of intubation.
It has already been shown that SNIPPV is more effective than NIPPV and CPAP in reducing the number of desaturations and apnoea in preterm infants undergoing CPAP treatment for prematurity apnoea. However, the effectiveness of SNIPPV compared to NIPPV in preterm infants with respiratory distress is still not completely clear.
Our study protocol was designed to evaluate the short-term effects of SNIPPV vs NIPPV on the major cardio-respiratory variables, trying to identify the best ventilation modality for preterm newborns at their first approach to NIV ventilation support, on the bases of cardio-respiratory events reduction and fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2) request.
NUMBER OF PATIENTS The number of patients to be enrolled is calculated based on a predicted difference of 30% in cardio-respiratory events between the two ventilation modalities. Assuming a mean of 5 and a SD of 1.5 events/hour (based on available literature data), the number of patients to be enrolled is 30, to obtain an 80% power and a significance threshold of 0.05.
STUDY DESIGN The decision to use a NIV support is based on clinical evaluation. At starting of NIV, eligible patients will be allocated to one of the two arms (NIPPV or SNIPPV) by block randomization. A custom software will be used to obtain a casual sequence to randomize patients in both arms, creating a balance between patients needing NIV as first intention or after extubating.
After 2 hours of stabilization (stabilization phase) in NIV, enrolled patients will be alternatively ventilated with 2 different techniques for 2 time frame of 4 hours each.
In case of needing surfactant, the stabilization phase will be 4 hours after its administration.
Infants will be kept supine throughout the study. During the whole study duration (including stabilization phase) all patients will be continuously monitored with a multiparametric monitor, recording also data from the ventilator. The first hour of each NIPPV/SNIPPV phase will be considered as wash-out phase and named "adaptation phase": data recorded during this phase are excluded from the analysis. Milk meals will be administered during the adaptation phase.
Pain and compliance scales will be filled in by nurses every 60 minutes. EGA values will be recorded at the end of the stabilization phase, at the end of Phase A (first NIV modality) and Phase B (second NIV modality).
Patients will considered drop out of the study in case of:
- NIV failure criteria: FiO2 > 40%, pH < 7.2, pCO2 > 65mmHg, ≥ 3 episodes of desaturations (transcutaneous O2 saturation (SatO2 TC) < 80%) per hour, ≥ 3 episodes of apnea (> 20 s) and/or bradycardia (heart rate (HR) < 80 beats per minute (bpm)) per hour, Silverman score >6. Necrotizing enterocolitis, bowel perforation, and hemodynamic instability as indications of NIV failure
- Air leak syndrome (i.e. pneumothorax)
- Needing of invasive procedures during the study
- Needing of surfactant during the study
- Development of hemodynamic instability or surgical problems during the study
- Death Data obtained from dropouts (patients who drop out of the study) will be analyzed separately.
After 8 hours of study, each patient will be ventilated with the best NIV modality according to clinical data and cardio-respiratory parameters observed during the study.
MONITORING Nurse staff will continuously monitor patients to avoid biases due to device wrong positioning
DATA
For each patient enrolled the following variables will be collected:
- ANAMNESTIC VARIABLES:
- Gestational age at birth
- Birth weight
- Delivery type
- APGAR at 1/5 minutes (and 10 minutes if available)
- Presence of intrauterine growth restriction
- Maternal administration of magnesium sulphate
- Steroid prenatal prophylaxis (number of doses)
- Intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis (if indicated)
- Presence of intraamniotic infection and administration of intrapartum antibiotic therapy
- CLINICAL VARIABLES
- Surfactant administration (time and number of doses)
- Type and duration of MV previously administered (if any)
- Type and duration of NIV previously administered (if any)
- Corrected GA at enrolling
- Caffeine doses administered (if any)
- Neonatal Pain Scale score
- CARDIO-RESPIRATORY VARIABLES
- FiO2 to maintain SatO2 TC 90-94% (as weighted mean)
- NIV failure and endotracheal intubation
- Number of cardiorespiratory events, defined as episodes of apnea lasting more than 20 seconds or over 5 seconds if followed by desaturation or bradycardia and/or episodes of desaturation with blood oxygen saturation below 80% for 4 sec. or more and/or episodes of bradycardia with heart rate below 80 bpm
- OTHER POLYGRAPH VARIABLES (continuous monitoring)
- Heart rate
- Respiratory rate
- SatO2 TC
- Thoracic impedance
- From ventilator: trigger, pressure, flow
- Pressure in ventilator circuit
- LABORATORISTIC VARIABLES
- EGA values at the end of stabilization phase, Phase A and Phase B
RESULTS INTERPRETATION The main result will be the difference in cardio-respiratory events during SNIPPV versus NIPPV.
Tolerance to each of the two NIV modalities will be evaluated by evaluating the number of failure episodes and of cardio-respiratory events and analysing the scores for individual compliance and pain. The individual need for oxygen under the two modalities of NIV will be evaluated as a known risk factor for premature retinopathy and various other complications.
STATISTICAL ANLYSES Descriptive variables will be analyzed in function of their distribution. T student test or Mann Whitney U test in case of continuous variables (if normally or not normally distributed respectively) and chi-squared or fisher test for qualitative ones. All test will be two-sided with a significance threshold of 0.05.
EXPECTED RESULTS Identifying the best NIV modality for preterm newborns at their first approach to NIV ventilation support, on the bases of cardio-respiratory events reduction and fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2) request.
- Conditions
- Newborn Respiratory Distress, Preterm Infant
- Being tested
- NIPPV, SNIPPV
- Keywords
- preterm, ventilation, nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation, synchronization, cardio-respiratory events, newborn
- Medical subject headings
- Hyaline Membrane Disease, Premature Birth, Respiratory Aspiration
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
NIPPVDevice
Non invasive ventilation technique in which PIP and PEEP administration is not synchronized with newborn's respiratory efforts
SNIPPVDevice
Non invasive ventilation technique in which PIP and PEEP administration is synchronized with newborn's respiratory efforts through an algorithm based on flow detection
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Start ventilation with NIPPV | Experimental | Alternatively vented with NIPPV and SNIPPV Receives: Device: NIPPV; Device: SNIPPV |
| Start ventilation with SNIPPV | Experimental | Alternatively vented with SNIPPV and NIPPV Receives: Device: NIPPV; Device: SNIPPV |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Frequency of episodes of desaturation
Desaturation is defined as a blood oxygen saturation below 80% for 4 sec. or more
Measured: 3 hours of NIPPV vs 3 hours SNIPPV
Secondary outcomes (6)
Number of cardiorespiratory events
Cardiorespiratory events are defined as:
- Hypoxic episodes (SatO2 TC < 80% for at least 4 seconds)
- Apneas episodes (absence of breath for at least 20 sec or at least 5 sec if followed by desaturation or bradycardia)
- Bradycardia episodes (heart rate <80 bpm)
Measured: 3 hours of NIPPV vs 3 hours SNIPPV
O2 needing during SNIPPV vs NIPPV monitoring to maintain SatO2 TC between 90 and 94%
FiO2 weighted mean necessity
Measured: 3 hours of NIPPV vs 3 hours SNIPPV
Newborn pain score evaluation during SNIPPV vs NIPPV monitoring.
Neonatal Pain Scale Score
Measured: 3 hours of NIPPV vs 3 hours SNIPPV
Synchronization index
Percentage of spontaneous breaths supported by ventilator
Measured: 3 hours of NIPPV vs 3 hours SNIPPV
Patient-ventilator concordance
Time between the onset of the patient's inspiratory effort and mechanical inflation in synchronized ventilation
Measured: 3 hours of NIPPV vs 3 hours SNIPPV
Thoracoabdominal asynchrony
Phase difference between thoracic and abdominal impedance
Measured: 3 hours of NIPPV vs 3 hours SNIPPV
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted21 Sep 2017
- Study start16 Nov 2020
- Primary completion31 Dec 2024
- Study completion31 Dec 2024
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (21)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Newborn Respiratory DistressStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Masking
- Double blind
- Who is masked
- Participant, Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 30 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of Turin, Italy
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Francesco Cresi, MD, PhD, University of Turin, Italy
- Investigators
- Francesco Cresi, PhD, Study chair, Città della Salute e della Scienza - Ospedale S.Anna - University of TurinAlessandra Coscia, Prof., Study director, Città della Salute e della Scienza - Ospedale S.Anna - University of TurinElena Maggiora, MD, Principal investigator, Città della Salute e della Scienza - Ospedale S.Anna - University of Turin
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03289936
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- SyncNIV
- Acronym
- SyncNIV
- Status last verified
- Sep 2026
- First submitted
- 18 Sep 2017
- Last updated
- 15 Sep 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
Publications
Moretti C, Giannini L, Fassi C, Gizzi C, Papoff P, Colarizi P. Nasal flow-synchronized intermittent positive pressure ventilation to facilitate weaning in very low-birthweight infants: unmasked randomized controlled trial. Pediatr Int. 2008 Feb;50(1):85-91. doi: 10.1111/j.1442-200X.2007.02525.x.
PubMed 18279212Gizzi C, Montecchia F, Panetta V, Castellano C, Mariani C, Campelli M, Papoff P, Moretti C, Agostino R. Is synchronised NIPPV more effective than NIPPV and NCPAP in treating apnoea of prematurity (AOP)? A randomised cross-over trial. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2015 Jan;100(1):F17-23. doi: 10.1136/archdischild-2013-305892. Epub 2014 Oct 15.
PubMed 25318667Sweet DG, Carnielli V, Greisen G, Hallman M, Ozek E, Te Pas A, Plavka R, Roehr CC, Saugstad OD, Simeoni U, Speer CP, Vento M, Visser GHA, Halliday HL. European Consensus Guidelines on the Management of Respiratory Distress Syndrome - 2019 Update. Neonatology. 2019;115(4):432-450. doi: 10.1159/000499361. Epub 2019 Apr 11.
PubMed 30974433Cummings JJ, Polin RA; Committee on Fetus and Newborn, American Academy of Pediatrics. Noninvasive Respiratory Support. Pediatrics. 2016 Jan;137(1). doi: 10.1542/peds.2015-3758. Epub 2015 Dec 29.
PubMed 26715607Isayama T, Iwami H, McDonald S, Beyene J. Association of Noninvasive Ventilation Strategies With Mortality and Bronchopulmonary Dysplasia Among Preterm Infants: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. JAMA. 2016 Aug 9;316(6):611-24. doi: 10.1001/jama.2016.10708.
PubMed 27532916Owen LS, Manley BJ. Nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation in preterm infants: Equipment, evidence, and synchronization. Semin Fetal Neonatal Med. 2016 Jun;21(3):146-53. doi: 10.1016/j.siny.2016.01.003. Epub 2016 Feb 26.
PubMed 26922562Permall DL, Pasha AB, Chen XQ. Current insights in non-invasive ventilation for the treatment of neonatal respiratory disease. Ital J Pediatr. 2019 Aug 19;45(1):105. doi: 10.1186/s13052-019-0707-x.
PubMed 31426828Ferguson KN, Roberts CT, Manley BJ, Davis PG. Interventions to Improve Rates of Successful Extubation in Preterm Infants: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. JAMA Pediatr. 2017 Feb 1;171(2):165-174. doi: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2016.3015.
PubMed 27918754Lemyre B, Davis PG, De Paoli AG, Kirpalani H. Nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) versus nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP) for preterm neonates after extubation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Feb 1;2(2):CD003212. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003212.pub3.
PubMed 28146296Moretti C, Gizzi C, Montecchia F, Barbara CS, Midulla F, Sanchez-Luna M, Papoff P. Synchronized Nasal Intermittent Positive Pressure Ventilation of the Newborn: Technical Issues and Clinical Results. Neonatology. 2016;109(4):359-65. doi: 10.1159/000444898. Epub 2016 Jun 3.
PubMed 27251453Charles E, Hunt KA, Rafferty GF, Peacock JL, Greenough A. Work of breathing during HHHFNC and synchronised NIPPV following extubation. Eur J Pediatr. 2019 Jan;178(1):105-110. doi: 10.1007/s00431-018-3254-3. Epub 2018 Oct 30.
PubMed 30374754Salvo V, Lista G, Lupo E, Ricotti A, Zimmermann LJ, Gavilanes AW, Barberi I, Colivicchi M, Temporini F, Gazzolo D. Noninvasive ventilation strategies for early treatment of RDS in preterm infants: an RCT. Pediatrics. 2015 Mar;135(3):444-51. doi: 10.1542/peds.2014-0895. Epub 2015 Feb 9.
PubMed 25667244Manley BJ, Doyle LW, Owen LS, Davis PG. Extubating Extremely Preterm Infants: Predictors of Success and Outcomes following Failure. J Pediatr. 2016 Jun;173:45-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2016.02.016. Epub 2016 Mar 5.
PubMed 26960919Alexiou S, Panitch HB. Physiology of non-invasive respiratory support. Semin Fetal Neonatal Med. 2016 Jun;21(3):174-80. doi: 10.1016/j.siny.2016.02.007. Epub 2016 Feb 28.
PubMed 26923501Li W, Long C, Zhangxue H, Jinning Z, Shifang T, Juan M, Renjun L, Yuan S. Nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation versus nasal continuous positive airway pressure for preterm infants with respiratory distress syndrome: a meta-analysis and up-date. Pediatr Pulmonol. 2015 Apr;50(4):402-9. doi: 10.1002/ppul.23130. Epub 2014 Nov 21.
PubMed 25418007
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 15 Sep 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Short Term Effects of Synchronized vs. Non-synchronized NIPPV in Preterm Infants: Study Protocol for an Unmasked Randomized Crossover Trial.
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03289936
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- SyncNIV / SyncNIV
- Conditions
- Newborn Respiratory Distress, Preterm Infant
- Keywords
- preterm, ventilation, nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation, synchronization, cardio-respiratory events, newborn
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 30 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- University of Turin, ItalyUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 16 Nov 2020 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 31 Dec 2024 (actual)
- Study completion
- 31 Dec 2024 (actual)
- First posted
- 21 Sep 2017 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Comparing the cardio-respiratory adaptation and differences to non invasive ventilation techniques, nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) non synchronized vs synchronized (SNIPPV) in preterm newborns (gestational age at birth < 32 weeks) at their first approach to non invasive ventilation as first intention (soon after birth) or after extubation.
Detailed description
Respiratory problems are one of the major issues to deal with in preterm newborns.
Because of the immaturity of respiratory mechanisms and structures, the use of supporting devices is often necessary. These include both conventional mechanical ventilation (MV) techniques, which require the use of an endotracheal tube, as well as non-invasive ventilation (NIV) techniques that use softer ventilator-patient interfaces. Increasing attention is payed to the latter ones as less aggressive and associated with better outcomes both in terms of mortality and short and long-term complications, such as bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD).
Nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) is a NIV technique in which newborn airways are kept open between two pressure levels: peak inspiratory pressure (PIP) and positive end expiratory pressure (PEEP). The frequency and duration of each phase are defined by setting the inspiratory and expiratory times or the ventilation rate.
This technique has already shown its superiority in terms of reduced duration of MV, reduced necessity of intubation, decreased failure of extubating and reduced prevalence of BPD if compared with non-invasive techniques based on continuous pressure support, such as continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP). Recent meta-analyses of studies where NIPPV has been used as an alternative to CPAP following extubation show that it reduces need for re-ventilation and air leaks but without any reduction in BPD: there is insufficient evidence to recommend NIPPV as primary mode of respiratory support in the delivery room.
It should be specified that the ventilation rate on NIPPV does not reflect the real respiratory rate (RR) of the newborn, as the ventilator supplies the PIP regardless of newborn respiratory efforts. To reproduce a more physiological and gentle ventilation new devices able to detect newborn respiratory efforts and consequently supply a PIP have been developed to synchronize the ventilation rate with RR of the newborn.
The devices used for synchronization can identify newborn respiratory effort by detecting variation in flow or pressure. While in MV the exact beginning of inspiration can be detected through a continuous monitoring of pressure or through the precise interception of inspiratory and expiratory flow some difficulties occur in NIV where, as a consequence of the impossibility to detect expiratory flow, the moment of the exact beginning of spontaneous inspiration is hard to identify.
Recently, a new type of NIV ventilator equipped with a pressure sensor has been put on the market. The software of this ventilator is able to calculate the flow according to the pressure variations of the circuit and to capture the flow variations induced by spontaneous breathing allowing a synchronization of the flow with the patient's respiratory acts.
The use of a synchronized NIV technique would allow a more physiological respiratory support, reducing respiratory fatigue and improving newborn compliance. Despite these premises, the diffusion of synchronized NIPPV in neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) and works on its efficacy are limited.
Some authors have already demonstrated the benefits of using a synchronized NIV technique in terms of extubating success rate, BPD prevalence and mortality and neurocognitive development. Synchronized NIPPV (SNIPPV) seems more effective than NIPPV and NCPAP in reducing need for intubation in respiratory distress syndrome (RDS), in improving the success of extubation and in treating apnea of prematurity, with a reassuring absence of relevant side effects. Synchronised NIPPV delivered through a ventilator can reduce extubation failure but may not confer long-term advantages such as reduction in BPD. Other reported advantageous aspects of SNIPPV include improved thoraco-abdominal synchrony, reduced work of breathing (WOB) and reduced need of intubation.
It has already been shown that SNIPPV is more effective than NIPPV and CPAP in reducing the number of desaturations and apnoea in preterm infants undergoing CPAP treatment for prematurity apnoea. However, the effectiveness of SNIPPV compared to NIPPV in preterm infants with respiratory distress is still not completely clear.
Our study protocol was designed to evaluate the short-term effects of SNIPPV vs NIPPV on the major cardio-respiratory variables, trying to identify the best ventilation modality for preterm newborns at their first approach to NIV ventilation support, on the bases of cardio-respiratory events reduction and fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2) request.
NUMBER OF PATIENTS The number of patients to be enrolled is calculated based on a predicted difference of 30% in cardio-respiratory events between the two ventilation modalities. Assuming a mean of 5 and a SD of 1.5 events/hour (based on available literature data), the number of patients to be enrolled is 30, to obtain an 80% power and a significance threshold of 0.05.
STUDY DESIGN The decision to use a NIV support is based on clinical evaluation. At starting of NIV, eligible patients will be allocated to one of the two arms (NIPPV or SNIPPV) by block randomization. A custom software will be used to obtain a casual sequence to randomize patients in both arms, creating a balance between patients needing NIV as first intention or after extubating.
After 2 hours of stabilization (stabilization phase) in NIV, enrolled patients will be alternatively ventilated with 2 different techniques for 2 time frame of 4 hours each.
In case of needing surfactant, the stabilization phase will be 4 hours after its administration.
Infants will be kept supine throughout the study. During the whole study duration (including stabilization phase) all patients will be continuously monitored with a multiparametric monitor, recording also data from the ventilator. The first hour of each NIPPV/SNIPPV phase will be considered as wash-out phase and named "adaptation phase": data recorded during this phase are excluded from the analysis. Milk meals will be administered during the adaptation phase.
Pain and compliance scales will be filled in by nurses every 60 minutes. EGA values will be recorded at the end of the stabilization phase, at the end of Phase A (first NIV modality) and Phase B (second NIV modality).
Patients will considered drop out of the study in case of:
- NIV failure criteria: FiO2 > 40%, pH < 7.2, pCO2 > 65mmHg, ≥ 3 episodes of desaturations (transcutaneous O2 saturation (SatO2 TC) < 80%) per hour, ≥ 3 episodes of apnea (> 20 s) and/or bradycardia (heart rate (HR) < 80 beats per minute (bpm)) per hour, Silverman score >6. Necrotizing enterocolitis, bowel perforation, and hemodynamic instability as indications of NIV failure
- Air leak syndrome (i.e. pneumothorax)
- Needing of invasive procedures during the study
- Needing of surfactant during the study
- Development of hemodynamic instability or surgical problems during the study
- Death Data obtained from dropouts (patients who drop out of the study) will be analyzed separately.
After 8 hours of study, each patient will be ventilated with the best NIV modality according to clinical data and cardio-respiratory parameters observed during the study.
MONITORING Nurse staff will continuously monitor patients to avoid biases due to device wrong positioning
DATA
For each patient enrolled the following variables will be collected:
- ANAMNESTIC VARIABLES:
- Gestational age at birth
- Birth weight
- Delivery type
- APGAR at 1/5 minutes (and 10 minutes if available)
- Presence of intrauterine growth restriction
- Maternal administration of magnesium sulphate
- Steroid prenatal prophylaxis (number of doses)
- Intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis (if indicated)
- Presence of intraamniotic infection and administration of intrapartum antibiotic therapy
- CLINICAL VARIABLES
- Surfactant administration (time and number of doses)
- Type and duration of MV previously administered (if any)
- Type and duration of NIV previously administered (if any)
- Corrected GA at enrolling
- Caffeine doses administered (if any)
- Neonatal Pain Scale score
- CARDIO-RESPIRATORY VARIABLES
- FiO2 to maintain SatO2 TC 90-94% (as weighted mean)
- NIV failure and endotracheal intubation
- Number of cardiorespiratory events, defined as episodes of apnea lasting more than 20 seconds or over 5 seconds if followed by desaturation or bradycardia and/or episodes of desaturation with blood oxygen saturation below 80% for 4 sec. or more and/or episodes of bradycardia with heart rate below 80 bpm
- OTHER POLYGRAPH VARIABLES (continuous monitoring)
- Heart rate
- Respiratory rate
- SatO2 TC
- Thoracic impedance
- From ventilator: trigger, pressure, flow
- Pressure in ventilator circuit
- LABORATORISTIC VARIABLES
- EGA values at the end of stabilization phase, Phase A and Phase B
RESULTS INTERPRETATION The main result will be the difference in cardio-respiratory events during SNIPPV versus NIPPV.
Tolerance to each of the two NIV modalities will be evaluated by evaluating the number of failure episodes and of cardio-respiratory events and analysing the scores for individual compliance and pain. The individual need for oxygen under the two modalities of NIV will be evaluated as a known risk factor for premature retinopathy and various other complications.
STATISTICAL ANLYSES Descriptive variables will be analyzed in function of their distribution. T student test or Mann Whitney U test in case of continuous variables (if normally or not normally distributed respectively) and chi-squared or fisher test for qualitative ones. All test will be two-sided with a significance threshold of 0.05.
EXPECTED RESULTS Identifying the best NIV modality for preterm newborns at their first approach to NIV ventilation support, on the bases of cardio-respiratory events reduction and fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2) request.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Masking
- Double blind (participant, outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Start ventilation with NIPPV | Experimental | Device: NIPPV, Device: SNIPPVAlternatively vented with NIPPV and SNIPPV |
| Start ventilation with SNIPPV | Experimental | Device: NIPPV, Device: SNIPPVAlternatively vented with SNIPPV and NIPPV |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- Up to 32 weeks
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Child
Key inclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Gestational age at birth <32 weeks
- First approach to NIV ventilation (primary or after extubation)
- Parent's informed consent
Key exclusion criteria (6 listed)
- Neurological (including IVH > 2° grade) or surgical diseases
- Sepsis (clinical or laboratory confirmed)
- Chromosomal or genetic abnormalities
- Major malformations and congenital anomalies
- Cardiac problems (including hemodynamically significant PDA)
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| NIPPVNon invasive ventilation technique in which PIP and PEEP administration is not synchronized with newborn's respiratory efforts | Device | Start ventilation with NIPPV, Start ventilation with SNIPPV |
| SNIPPVNon invasive ventilation technique in which PIP and PEEP administration is synchronized with newborn's respiratory efforts through an algorithm based on flow detection | Device | Start ventilation with NIPPV, Start ventilation with SNIPPV |
Primary outcome
Frequency of episodes of desaturation
Time frame: 3 hours of NIPPV vs 3 hours SNIPPV
Desaturation is defined as a blood oxygen saturation below 80% for 4 sec. or more
6 secondary outcomes
Number of cardiorespiratory events
Time frame: 3 hours of NIPPV vs 3 hours SNIPPV
O2 needing during SNIPPV vs NIPPV monitoring to maintain SatO2 TC between 90 and 94%
Time frame: 3 hours of NIPPV vs 3 hours SNIPPV
Newborn pain score evaluation during SNIPPV vs NIPPV monitoring.
Time frame: 3 hours of NIPPV vs 3 hours SNIPPV
Synchronization index
Time frame: 3 hours of NIPPV vs 3 hours SNIPPV
Patient-ventilator concordance
Time frame: 3 hours of NIPPV vs 3 hours SNIPPV
Thoracoabdominal asynchrony
Time frame: 3 hours of NIPPV vs 3 hours SNIPPV
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 15 Sep 2026.
- Background: PubMed 18279212Moretti C, Giannini L, Fassi C, Gizzi C, Papoff P, Colarizi P. Nasal flow-synchronized intermittent positive pressure ventilation to facilitate weaning in very low-birthweight infants: unmasked randomized controlled trial. Pediatr Int. 2008 Feb;50(1):85-91. doi: 10.1111/j.1442-200X.2007.02525.x.
- Background: PubMed 25318667Gizzi C, Montecchia F, Panetta V, Castellano C, Mariani C, Campelli M, Papoff P, Moretti C, Agostino R. Is synchronised NIPPV more effective than NIPPV and NCPAP in treating apnoea of prematurity (AOP)? A randomised cross-over trial. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2015 Jan;100(1):F17-23. doi: 10.1136/archdischild-2013-305892. Epub 2014 Oct 15.
- Background: PubMed 30974433Sweet DG, Carnielli V, Greisen G, Hallman M, Ozek E, Te Pas A, Plavka R, Roehr CC, Saugstad OD, Simeoni U, Speer CP, Vento M, Visser GHA, Halliday HL. European Consensus Guidelines on the Management of Respiratory Distress Syndrome - 2019 Update. Neonatology. 2019;115(4):432-450. doi: 10.1159/000499361. Epub 2019 Apr 11.
- Background: PubMed 26715607Cummings JJ, Polin RA; Committee on Fetus and Newborn, American Academy of Pediatrics. Noninvasive Respiratory Support. Pediatrics. 2016 Jan;137(1). doi: 10.1542/peds.2015-3758. Epub 2015 Dec 29.
- Background: PubMed 27532916Isayama T, Iwami H, McDonald S, Beyene J. Association of Noninvasive Ventilation Strategies With Mortality and Bronchopulmonary Dysplasia Among Preterm Infants: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. JAMA. 2016 Aug 9;316(6):611-24. doi: 10.1001/jama.2016.10708.
- Background: PubMed 26922562Owen LS, Manley BJ. Nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation in preterm infants: Equipment, evidence, and synchronization. Semin Fetal Neonatal Med. 2016 Jun;21(3):146-53. doi: 10.1016/j.siny.2016.01.003. Epub 2016 Feb 26.
- Background: PubMed 31426828Permall DL, Pasha AB, Chen XQ. Current insights in non-invasive ventilation for the treatment of neonatal respiratory disease. Ital J Pediatr. 2019 Aug 19;45(1):105. doi: 10.1186/s13052-019-0707-x.
- Background: PubMed 27918754Ferguson KN, Roberts CT, Manley BJ, Davis PG. Interventions to Improve Rates of Successful Extubation in Preterm Infants: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. JAMA Pediatr. 2017 Feb 1;171(2):165-174. doi: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2016.3015.
- Background: PubMed 28146296Lemyre B, Davis PG, De Paoli AG, Kirpalani H. Nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) versus nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP) for preterm neonates after extubation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Feb 1;2(2):CD003212. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003212.pub3.
- Background: PubMed 27251453Moretti C, Gizzi C, Montecchia F, Barbara CS, Midulla F, Sanchez-Luna M, Papoff P. Synchronized Nasal Intermittent Positive Pressure Ventilation of the Newborn: Technical Issues and Clinical Results. Neonatology. 2016;109(4):359-65. doi: 10.1159/000444898. Epub 2016 Jun 3.
- Background: PubMed 30374754Charles E, Hunt KA, Rafferty GF, Peacock JL, Greenough A. Work of breathing during HHHFNC and synchronised NIPPV following extubation. Eur J Pediatr. 2019 Jan;178(1):105-110. doi: 10.1007/s00431-018-3254-3. Epub 2018 Oct 30.
- Background: PubMed 25667244Salvo V, Lista G, Lupo E, Ricotti A, Zimmermann LJ, Gavilanes AW, Barberi I, Colivicchi M, Temporini F, Gazzolo D. Noninvasive ventilation strategies for early treatment of RDS in preterm infants: an RCT. Pediatrics. 2015 Mar;135(3):444-51. doi: 10.1542/peds.2014-0895. Epub 2015 Feb 9.
Related trials for Newborn Respiratory Distress
Recruiting
Amnioinfusion's Protective Effects on Respiratory and Longitudinal Pediatric Outcomes After Intrapartum Meconium Exposure
Neonatal Respiratory Distress Related Conditions, Meconium
Recruiting
Ventilator Pressure and Optimization of Compliance and Hemodynamics
Bronchopulmonary Dysplasia, Pulmonary Hypertension Due to Lung Diseases and Hypoxia
Active, not recruiting
Measuring Diaphragm Electrical Activity in Neonates Using a Smaller Inter-electrode Distance
Respiratory Distress Syndrome, Newborn, Infant, Premature
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Chest Ultrasound as Diagnostic and Prognostic Tool in Neonatal RDS
Respiratory Distress Syndrome, Newborn, Neonatal Respiratory Distress
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Effect of Automated Oxygen Control on Early-childhood Lung Mechanics
Prematurity, Respiratory Distress Neonatal
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Francesco Cresi, PhD study chair
Città della Salute e della Scienza - Ospedale S.Anna - University of Turin
Alessandra Coscia, Prof. study director
Città della Salute e della Scienza - Ospedale S.Anna - University of Turin
Elena Maggiora, MD principal investigator
Città della Salute e della Scienza - Ospedale S.Anna - University of Turin
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing NIPPV and SNIPPV in people with Newborn Respiratory Distress and Preterm Infant, run by University of Turin, Italy at 1 site in Italy.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 3 inclusion and 6 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 15 Sep 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Italy. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Frequency of episodes of desaturation (time frame: 3 hours of NIPPV vs 3 hours SNIPPV). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT03289936, which also lists 21 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 15 Sep 2026.