Using nasal High Flow from birth in premature infants - a pilot study

  • Research type

    Research Study

  • Full title

    A pilot study to determine the feasibility of the use of nasal High Flow from birth in premature infants born at less than or equal to 30 weeks gestational age.

  • IRAS ID

    131594

  • Contact name

    Peter Reynolds

  • Contact email

    Peter.Reynolds@asph.nhs.uk

  • Research summary

    Recent large studies have shown that not all premature babies need to be intubated (have a breathing tube inserted) and ventilated, nor do they all need to be given lung surfactant routinely. Those studies showed that even very small babies can be safely supported using Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (nCPAP) which is applied tightly to the nose using nasal prongs. This is a type of non-invasive ventilation (NIV) so that the babies continue to breath, albeit with additional support to reduce their work of breathing. However nCPAP has some drawbacks, including that it can cause skin damage to the nose, and that the heating and humidification of the gas is not always sufficient. We have been using, for over 5 years, a different system to support babies after routine intubation. This is another type of non-invasive ventilation called nasal High Flow (nHF). Published trials show that it is at least as effective as nCPAP to provide NIV and to prevent the subsequent need for intubation and/or surfactant. However nHF is superior to nCPAP in respect it does not cause nose damage and its heating and humidification is excellent. This pilot study aims to describe and evaluate the use of nHF, using a standard commercially available system (Precision Flow, Vapotherm Inc.), from birth, in babies born less than 30 completed weeks gestation, with a view to avoiding intubation and ventilation. This study is important to establish the feasibility of using nHF immediately after birth.

  • REC name

    London - Surrey Borders Research Ethics Committee

  • REC reference

    13/LO/1474

  • Date of REC Opinion

    28 Nov 2013

  • REC opinion

    Further Information Favourable Opinion