MedTrace Logo

Non Invasive Ventilation Versus Continuous Positive Airway Pressure After Extubation of Very Low Birth Weight Infants.

NCT01778829 · Status: UNKNOWN · Phase: PHASE3 · Type: INTERVENTIONAL · Enrollment: 220

Last updated 2013-01-29

No results posted yet for this study

Summary

The purpose of this study is to determine whether Nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) non synchronized is better than continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP)in preventing extubation failure within 72 h, after extubation of very low birth weight infants at the NEOCOSUR Network.

Conditions

  • Neonatal Respiratory Failure

Interventions

PROCEDURE

CPAP ventilation mode

Patients are ventilated through a nasal prong coneected to a ventilator that provides a continuous positive airway pressure

PROCEDURE

NIPPV ventilation mode

Patients are ventilated through a nasal prong connected to a ventilator that provides a non synchronized intermittent positive pressure ventilation

Sponsors & Collaborators

  • Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile

    lead OTHER

Principal Investigators

  • Alberto Estay, MD · Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile

Study Design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE
Model
PARALLEL

Eligibility

Min Age
2 Hours
Max Age
14 Days
Sex
ALL
Healthy Volunteers
No

Timeline & Regulatory

Start
2011-12-31
Primary Completion
2013-05-31
Completion
2013-06-30

Countries

  • Chile

Study Locations

More Related Trials

Read the full study record

This page highlights key information. For complete eligibility criteria, study locations, investigator contacts, and the full protocol, visit the original record on ClinicalTrials.gov.

View NCT01778829 on ClinicalTrials.gov