Noninvasive High-Frequency Oscillatory Ventilation vs Nasal Continuous Positive Airway Pressure vs Nasal Intermittent Positive Pressure Ventilation as Postextubation Support for Preterm Neonates in China: A Randomized Clinical Trial
Xingwang Zhu,HongBo Qi,Zhichun Feng,Yuan Shi,Daniele De Luca,Nasal Oscillation Post-Extubation (NASONE) Study Group,Yuan Shi Prof,Daniele De Luca Prof,Xingwang Zhu Dr,Zhichun Feng Prof,Hongbo Qi Prof,Xiaoyun Zhong Prof,Sijie Song Dr,Lan Zhang Dr,Li Li Prof,Huiqiang Liu Dr,Xiaomei Tong Prof,Xiaojing Xu Dr,LiFeng Cui Dr,Ming Yi Dr,Zhoujie Peng Dr,Jie Li Dr,Dongmei Chen Dr,Weifeng Zhang Dr,Xinzhu Lin Prof,Bin Wang Prof,Weimin Huang Prof,Guangliang Bi Dr,Shaoru He Prof,Yumei Liu Prof,Jie Yang Prof,Weiwei Gao Dr,Wuhua Liang Dr,Yaoxun Wu Dr,Xinnian Pan Prof,Qiufen Wei Prof,Yujun Chen Prof,Bingmei Wei Dr,Ling Liu Prof,Xinghui Zheng Dr,Ding Xu Prof,Fan Wang Prof,Bin Yi Prof,Jingyun Shi Prof,Yuning Li Prof,Li Jiang Prof,Chunming Jiang Prof,Chenghe Tang Prof,Hong Xiong Prof,Huiqing Sun Prof,Wenqing Kang Prof,Dapeng Liu Dr,Falin Xu Prof,Kaihui Xing Dr,Ning Yang Dr,Fang Liu Dr,Shaoguang Lv Dr,Hanchu Liu Prof,Wenchao Yuan Dr,Rui Cheng Prof,Xian Shen Dr,Hui Wu Prof,Laishuan Wang Prof,Zhenying Yang Dr,Xiao Zhang Dr,Jiang Xue Prof,Zhankui Li Prof,Rong Ju Dr,Jin Wang Dr,Wenbin Dong Prof,Xiaoxiu Ye Dr,Benqing Wu Prof,Jun Zheng Prof,Xiuying Tian Dr,Mingxia Li Prof,Yanping Zhu Dr,Nuerya Rejiafu Dr,Long Li Prof,Yangfang Li Prof,Canlin He Dr,Hongying Mi Dr,Kun Liang Prof,Hong Cao Dr,Linlin Xia Dr,Chuanfeng Li Dr,Zhaoqing Yin Dr,Le Su Dr,Yanxiang Chen Prof,Liping Shi Prof,Chenhong Wang Dr,Jiajun Zhu Prof,Xuefeng Zhang Prof,Xirong Gao Prof,Bo Lv Dr,Chongde Liu Prof,Xiaorong Wang Dr,Liping Chen Prof,Lin Li Dr,Chunli Zhang Prof,Jia Chen Dr,Qiyu Li Dr,Qin Lv Prof,Yanhong Li Dr,Yong Ji Prof,Yanjiang Chen Dr,Jianhua Sun Prof,Jun Bu Dr,Danni Zhong Prof,Zongyan Cao Dr,Shuping Han Prof,Xiaohui Chen Dr,Caiyun Gao Dr,Hongbin Zhu Dr,Zhenguang Li Dr,Hongwei Wu Dr,Xiuyong Cheng Prof,Juhua Li Dr,Long Chen Dr,Huanhuan Li Dr
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapediatrics.2022.0710
2022-06-01
Abstract:Importance: Several respiratory support techniques are available to minimize the use of invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) in preterm neonates. It is unknown whether noninvasive high-frequency oscillatory ventilation (NHFOV) is more efficacious than nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP) or nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) in preterm neonates after their first extubation. Objective: To test the hypothesis that NHFOV is more efficacious than NCPAP or NIPPV in reducing IMV after extubation and until neonatal intensive care unit discharge among preterm neonates. Design, setting, and participants: This multicenter, pathophysiology-based, assessor-blinded, 3-group, randomized clinical trial was conducted in 69 tertiary referral neonatal intensive care units in China, recruiting participants from December 1, 2017, to May 31, 2021. Preterm neonates who were between the gestational age of 25 weeks plus 0 days and 32 weeks plus 6 days and were ready to be extubated were randomized to receive NCPAP, NIPPV or NHFOV. Data were analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis. Interventions: The NCPAP, NIPPV, or NHFOV treatment was initiated after the first extubation and lasted until discharge. Main outcomes and measures: Primary outcomes were total duration of IMV, need for reintubation, and ventilator-free days. These outcomes were chosen to describe the effect of noninvasive ventilation strategy on the general need for IMV. Results: A total of 1440 neonates (mean [SD] age at birth, 29.4 [1.8] weeks; 860 boys [59.7%]) were included in the trial. Duration of IMV was longer in NIPPV (mean difference, 1.2; 95% CI, 0.01-2.3 days; P = .04) and NCPAP (mean difference, 1.5 days; 95% CI, 0.3-2.7 days; P = .01) compared with NHFOV. Neonates who were treated with NCPAP needed reintubations more often than those who were treated with NIPPV (risk difference: 8.1%; 95% CI, 2.9%-13.3%; P = .003) and NHFOV (risk difference, 12.5%; 95% CI, 7.5%-17.4%; P < .001). There were fewer ventilator-free days in neonates treated with NCPAP than in those treated with NIPPV (median [25th-75th percentile] difference, -3 [-6 to -1] days; P = .01). There were no differences between secondary efficacy or safety outcomes, except for the use of postnatal corticosteroids (lower in NHFOV than in NCPAP group; risk difference, 7.3%; 95% CI, 2.6%-12%; P = .002), weekly weight gain (higher in NHFOV than in NCPAP group; mean difference, -0.9 g/d; 95% CI, -1.8 to 0 g/d; P = .04), and duration of study intervention (shorter in NHFOV than in NIPPV group; median [25th-75th percentile] difference, -1 [-3 to 0] days; P = .01). Conclusions and relevance: Results of this trial indicated that NHFOV, if used after extubation and until discharge, slightly reduced the duration of IMV in preterm neonates, and both NHFOV and NIPPV resulted in a lower risk of reintubation than NCPAP. All 3 respiratory support techniques were equally safe for this patient population. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03181958.