跳至主要内容
临床试验/NCT01189162
NCT01189162Unknown不适用

High Flow Nasal Cannula Versus Nasal Intermittent Mandatory Ventilation for Respiratory Distress Syndrome: a Randomized, Controlled, Prospective Study

Bnai Zion Medical Center1 个研究点 分布在 1 个国家目标入组 80 人开始时间: 2010年1月最近更新:
适应症

试验速览

阶段
不适用
入组人数
80
试验地点
1
主要终点
The percent of infants who will fail NRS and need endotracheal ventilation or will be switched to another mode of NRS.

研究概览

简要总结

The investigators hypothesize that while the extremely low birthweight (ELBW) infants (<1000 g) may need NIMV for the treatment of RDS, larger infants or the smaller ones post extubation may enjoy the comfort benefits associated with HFNC while getting coparable respiratory support to NIMV.

研究设计

研究类型
Interventional
分配方式
Randomized
干预模型
Parallel
主要目的
Treatment
盲法
None

入排标准

年龄范围
1 Minute 至 —(Child, Adult, Older Adult)
性别
All
接受健康志愿者

入选标准

  • Gestational age between 24 to 34 and 6/7 weeks assessed by the obstetrical team from dating of last menstural period or ultrasound and weight >1000 g for the initial treatment of RDS or <35 weeks post extubation or for apnea of prematurity
  • Infants with RDS who will need NRS as initial therapy or after extubation and for apnea of prematurity,
  • written informed consent.

排除标准

  • Significant morbidity apart from RDS including: cardiac disease (not including patent ductus arteriosus [PDA]), congenital malformation, or if they had cardiovascular or respiratory instability because of sepsis, anemia or severe intraventricular hemorrhage (IVH),
  • Parents refuse consent.
  • Unavailability of suitable ventilator.

结局指标

主要结局

The percent of infants who will fail NRS and need endotracheal ventilation or will be switched to another mode of NRS.

时间窗: 1 year

次要结局

  • Clinical features on both methods(1 year)
  • % of infants with possible side effects on both methods(1 year)
  • % of infants with neonatal morbidities on both methods(1 year)

研究者

申办方类型
Other Gov
责任方
Sponsor

研究点 (1)

Loading locations...

相似试验