AzTrials
AzTrials

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.

Completed

Finished. The study has ended and is not enrolling. Results may be posted on the official record.

Official record
Search all trials

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.

Italy1 site
  • Ospedale S.Anna di Torino

    Torino, (TO), 10126

Other trials in Italy

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:

  1. 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
  2. Air leak syndrome (i.e. pneumothorax)
  3. Needing of invasive procedures during the study
  4. Needing of surfactant during the study
  5. Development of hemodynamic instability or surgical problems during the study
  6. 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.

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 groups in NCT03289936
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
Start ventilation with NIPPVExperimentalAlternatively vented with NIPPV and SNIPPV
Receives: Device: NIPPV; Device: SNIPPV
Start ventilation with SNIPPVExperimentalAlternatively 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.

  1. 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)
  1. Number of cardiorespiratory events

    Cardiorespiratory events are defined as:

    1. Hypoxic episodes (SatO2 TC < 80% for at least 4 seconds)
    2. Apneas episodes (absence of breath for at least 20 sec or at least 5 sec if followed by desaturation or bradycardia)
    3. Bradycardia episodes (heart rate <80 bpm)

    Measured: 3 hours of NIPPV vs 3 hours SNIPPV

  2. 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

  3. Newborn pain score evaluation during SNIPPV vs NIPPV monitoring.

    Neonatal Pain Scale Score

    Measured: 3 hours of NIPPV vs 3 hours SNIPPV

  4. Synchronization index

    Percentage of spontaneous breaths supported by ventilator

    Measured: 3 hours of NIPPV vs 3 hours SNIPPV

  5. 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

  6. 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.

  1. First posted21 Sep 2017
  2. Study start16 Nov 2020
  3. Primary completion31 Dec 2024
  4. Study completion31 Dec 2024

Resources

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)
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 18279212
  • Gizzi 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 25318667
  • Sweet 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 30974433
  • Cummings 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 26715607
  • Isayama 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 27532916
  • Owen 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 26922562
  • Permall 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 31426828
  • Ferguson 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 27918754
  • Lemyre 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 28146296
  • Moretti 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 27251453
  • Charles 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 30374754
  • Salvo 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 25667244
  • Manley 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 26960919
  • Alexiou 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 26923501
  • Li 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

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.

Free account

Keep searching with a free account

You’ve used your 3 free searches for this session. Log in or create a free AzTrials account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in