A multicentre, randomised controlled, non-inferiority trial, comparing nasal high flow with nasal continuous positive airway pressure as primary support for newborn infants with early respiratory distress born in Australian non-tertiary special care nurseries (the HUNTER trial): study protocol

A Comparison of Moderate to Late Preterm Neonates Receiving Nasal Continuous Positive Airway Pressure in Australian Tertiary and Nontertiary Centers

PURPOSE

Transfer of neonates ≥32 weeks' gestation with acute respiratory distress to tertiary (T) centers can be reduced by treatment with nasal continuous positive airway pressure (nCPAP) in nontertiary (NT) centers. This can lead to considerable financial and emotional benefits. The aim of this project was to compare management of nCPAP in T and NT centers.

DESIGN

Five-year retrospective, observational cohort study (2010-2014).

SAMPLE

All NT eligible neonates from four sites (n = 484) were compared with a similar randomized cohort of inborn neonates at two T centers (n = 601) in Victoria, Australia.

MAIN OUTCOME VARIABLE

Any difference in management or short-term outcome.

RESULTS

Moderately preterm and term neonates born in NT centers had lower Apgar scores at five minutes of age and received more conservative management delivered by different equipment. Despite a higher incidence of air leaks in NT centers, the short-term outcomes were otherwise similar between centers. T centers were more likely to administer nCPAP to term babies for <24 hours.

Cost-Effectiveness of Nasal High Flow Versus CPAP for Newborn Infants in Special-Care Nurseries

BACKGROUND

Treating respiratory distress in newborns is expensive. We compared the cost-effectiveness of 2 common noninvasive therapies, nasal continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) and nasal high-flow (nHF), for newborn infants cared for in nontertiary special care nurseries.

METHODS

The economic evaluation was planned alongside a randomized control trial conducted in 9 Australian special care nurseries. Costs were considered from a hospital perspective until infants were 12 months of age. A total of 754 infants with respiratory distress, born ≥31 weeks' gestation and with birth weight ≥1200 g, <24 hours old, requiring noninvasive respiratory support and/or supplemental oxygen for >1 hour were recruited during 2015-2017. Inpatient costing records were obtained for 753 infants, of whom 676 were included in the per-protocol analysis. Two scenarios were considered: (1) CPAP versus nHF, with infants in the nHF group having "rescue" CPAP backup available (trial scenario); and (2) CPAP versus nHF, as sole primary support (hypothetical scenario). Effectiveness outcomes were rate of endotracheal intubation and transfer to a tertiary-level NICU.

RESULTS

As sole primary support, CPAP is more effective and on average cheaper, and thus is superior. However, nHF with back-up CPAP produced equivalent cost and effectiveness results, and there is no reason to make a decision between the 2 treatments on the basis of the cost or effectiveness outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Nontertiary special care nurseries choosing to use only 1 of the modes should choose CPAP. In units with both modes available, using nHF as first-line therapy may be acceptable if there is back-up CPAP.

Predicting Nasal High-Flow Treatment Success in Newborn Infants with Respiratory Distress Cared for in Nontertiary Hospitals

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate demographic and clinical variables as predictors of nasal high-flow treatment success in newborn infants with respiratory distress cared for in Australian nontertiary special care nurseries.

STUDY DESIGN

A secondary analysis of the HUNTER trial, a multicenter, randomized controlled trial evaluating nasal high-flow as primary respiratory support for newborn infants with respiratory distress who were born ≥31 weeks of gestation and with birth weight ≥1200 g, and cared for in Australian nontertiary special care nurseries. Treatment success within 72 hours after randomization to nasal high-flow was determined using objective criteria. Univariable screening and multivariable analysis was used to determine predictors of nasal high-flow treatment success.

RESULTS

Infants (n = 363) randomized to nasal high-flow in HUNTER were included in the analysis; the mean gestational age was 36.9 ± 2.7 weeks and birth weight 2928 ± 782 g. Of these infants, 290 (80%) experienced nasal high-flow treatment success. On multivariable analysis, nasal high-flow treatment success was predicted by higher gestational age and lower fraction of inspired oxygen immediately before randomization, but not strongly. The final model was found to have an area under the curve of 0.65, which after adjustment for optimism was found to be 0.63 (95% CI, 0.57-0.70).

CONCLUSIONS

Gestational age and supplemental oxygen requirement may be used to guide decisions regarding the most appropriate initial respiratory support for newborn infants in nontertiary special care nurseries. Further prospective research is required to better identify which infants are most likely to be successfully treated with nasal high-flow.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ACTRN12614001203640.

Best practices, challenges and innovations in pediatrics in 2019

This paper runs through key progresses in epidemiology, pathomechanisms and therapy of various diseases in children that were issued in the Italian Journal of Pediatrics at the end of last year. Novel research and documents that explore areas such as allergy, critical care, endocrinology, gastroenterology, infectious diseases, neonatology, neurology, nutrition, and respiratory tract illnesses in children have been reported. These observations will help to control childhood illnesses.

Non-invasive respiratory support for preterm infants following extubation from mechanical ventilation. A narrative review and guideline suggestion

The recent introduction of different non-invasive ventilation modes for preterm has decreased the need for intubation, invasive ventilation and sedation. However, specific guidelines for each non-invasive mode are still lacking. This paper reviews available evidence for each of the commonly used noninvasive mode. Electronic search was carried out as a step forward towards a more comprehensive and detailed neonatal noninvasive ventilation guideline.

Current insights in non-invasive ventilation for the treatment of neonatal respiratory disease

Deleterious consequences of the management of respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) with invasive ventilation have led to more in-depth investigation of non-invasive ventilation (NIV) modalities. NIV has significantly and positively altered the treatment outcomes and improved mortality rates of preterm infants with RDS. Among the different NIV modes, nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) has shown considerable benefits compared to nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP). Despite reports of heated humidified high-flow nasal cannula’s (HHHFNC) non-inferiority compared to NCPAP, some trials have been terminated due to high treatment failure rates with HHHFNC use. Moreover, RDS management with the combination of INSURE (INtubation SURfactant Extubation) technique and NIV ensures higher success rates. This review elaborates on the currently used various modes of NIV and novel techniques are also briefly discussed.

Nasal High-Flow Therapy for Newborn Infants in Special Care Nurseries

BACKGROUND

Nasal high-flow therapy is an alternative to nasal continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) as a means of respiratory support for newborn infants. The efficacy of high-flow therapy in nontertiary special care nurseries is unknown.

METHODS

We performed a multicenter, randomized, noninferiority trial involving newborn infants (<24 hours of age; gestational age, ≥31 weeks) in special care nurseries in Australia. Newborn infants with respiratory distress and a birth weight of at least 1200 g were assigned to treatment with either high-flow therapy or CPAP. The primary outcome was treatment failure within 72 hours after randomization. Infants in whom high-flow therapy failed could receive CPAP. Noninferiority was determined by calculating the absolute difference in the risk of the primary outcome, with a noninferiority margin of 10 percentage points.

RESULTS

A total of 754 infants (mean gestational age, 36.9 weeks, and mean birth weight, 2909 g) were included in the primary intention-to-treat analysis. Treatment failure occurred in 78 of 381 infants (20.5%) in the high-flow group and in 38 of 373 infants (10.2%) in the CPAP group (risk difference, 10.3 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 5.2 to 15.4). In a secondary per-protocol analysis, treatment failure occurred in 49 of 339 infants (14.5%) in the high-flow group and in 27 of 338 infants (8.0%) in the CPAP group (risk difference, 6.5 percentage points; 95% CI, 1.7 to 11.2). The incidences of mechanical ventilation, transfer to a tertiary neonatal intensive care unit, and adverse events did not differ significantly between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Nasal high-flow therapy was not shown to be noninferior to CPAP and resulted in a significantly higher incidence of treatment failure than CPAP when used in nontertiary special care nurseries as early respiratory support for newborn infants with respiratory distress. (Funded by the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council and Monash University; HUNTER Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry number, ACTRN12614001203640.).

Nasal high flow therapy for neonates: Current evidence and future directions

Nasal high flow (nHF) therapy is a commonly used method of providing non-invasive respiratory support for neonates. It has several potential mechanisms of action: continuous distending pressure, nasopharyngeal dead space washout, provision of heated and humidified gases and reduction of work of breathing. nHF is used in a number of clinical scenarios for preterm and term infants, including primary respiratory and post-extubation support. In recent years, large trials have generated evidence pertinent to these indications. Novel applications for nHF in neonates warrant further research: during endotracheal intubation, for initial delivery room stabilisation of preterm infants and in conjunction with minimally invasive surfactant therapy.