Elsevier

The Journal of Pediatrics

Volume 161, Issue 5, November 2012, Pages 808-813.e2
The Journal of Pediatrics

Original Article
Randomized Crossover Study of Neurally Adjusted Ventilatory Assist in Preterm Infants

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpeds.2012.04.040Get rights and content

Objective

To determine whether neurally adjusted ventilatory assist (NAVA), a new method of mechanical ventilation that delivers pressure assistance that is proportional to the electrical activity of the diaphragm (EAdi), could lower the inspiratory pressure and respiratory muscle load in preterm infants supported with ventilators.

Study design

Twenty-six mechanically ventilated preterm infants were randomized to crossover ventilation with NAVA and synchronized intermittent mandatory ventilation (SIMV) with pressure support (PS) for 4 hours each in a randomized order. A 1-hour interval for washout was provided between the 2 modes of ventilation. The ventilator settings were adjusted to maintain similar levels of end-tidal partial pressure of CO2. The ventilator parameters, vital signs, and gas exchange effects under the 2 ventilatory modes were compared.

Results

Nineteen infants completed the 9-hour crossover comparison protocol. Peak inspiratory pressure (PIP), work of breathing, and peak EAdi with NAVA were lower than those in SIMV with PS. Calculated tidal volume to peak EAdi ratio and PIP to peak EAdi ratio were higher with NAVA. There were no significant differences in mean airway pressure, inspiratory oxygen fraction, and blood gas values. The measurements of vital signs did not differ significantly between the 2 modes.

Conclusion

NAVA lowered PIP and reduced respiratory muscle load in preterm infants at equivalent inspiratory oxygen fraction and partial pressure of CO2 of capillary blood in comparison with SIMV with PS.

Section snippets

Methods

A prospective, randomized, controlled, crossover comparison of NAVA and SIMV with PS was conducted from March-August of 2011 in the neonatal intensive care unit of Seoul National University Children's Hospital in Seoul, Korea. Approval for this study was obtained by the Seoul National University Hospital Institutional Review Board, and written informed consent was obtained from the parents of neonates prior to their enrollment in this study. This study was conducted in compliance with the

Results

Of the 26 preterm infants enrolled, 2 patients were excluded prior to the study, and 5 patients discontinued the protocol because they met a criterion for termination during the study. The remaining 19 patients completed the 9-hour crossover comparison study (Figure 2).

One of the 5 patients was terminated after initiation of the protocol because the parents withdrew their consent for the study. For the remaining 4, tachypnea (RR >80/min) developed. Tachypnea developed in 3 of the patients

Discussion

The present study showed that NAVA lowered the delivered PIP with a decrease in the EAdi and lowered the respiratory work while maintaining an equivalent supply of oxygen and gas exchange relative to SIMV with PS. Although the absolute reduction of inspiratory pressure was small, the difference is probably significant because our study was conducted over a relatively short 4-hour period. Recently, Stein at al19 reported a retrospective analysis, which demonstrated NAVA provided better blood gas

References (26)

  • J. Beck et al.

    Patient–ventilator interaction during neurally adjusted ventilatory assist in low birth weight infants

    Pediatr Res

    (2009)
  • P. Navalesi et al.

    Nava ventilation

    Minerva Anestesiol

    (2010)
  • M. Alander et al.

    Comparison of pressure-, flow-, and NAVA-triggering in pediatric and neonatal ventilatory care

    Pediatr Pulmonol

    (2012)
  • Cited by (74)

    • Neonatal Respiratory Therapy

      2023, Avery's Diseases of the Newborn
    • NIV-NAVA versus NCPAP immediately after birth in premature infants: A randomized controlled trial

      2022, Respiratory Physiology and Neurobiology
      Citation Excerpt :

      The Edi signal is considered a respiratory vital sign (Stein and Firestone, 2014), and it provides us with a unique opportunity to investigate breathing patterns and breathing effort (Beck et al., 2011; De Waal et al., 2017; Gibu et al., 2017; Lee et al., 2021a, 2021b, 2015, 2012; Oda et al., 2021; Parikka et al., 2015; Soukka et al., 2014). In neonatal studies, it has been successfully used to compare the effects of different respiratory support modes on breathing (Lee et al., 2015, 2012; Mally et al., 2018; Nasef et al., 2015; Stein et al., 2013). In addition, the Edi signal has been used to assess the favorable effects of prone position, skin-to-skin care and medications on respiratory effort and drive (Kato et al., 2021; Lee et al., 2021b; Parikka et al., 2015; Soukka et al., 2014).

    • Special techniques of respiratory support

      2022, Goldsmith's Assisted Ventilation of the Neonate: An Evidence-Based Approach to Newborn Respiratory Care, Seventh Edition
    View all citing articles on Scopus

    Supported by the Research and Development Project of Korea Health Industry Development Institute, Ministry of Health and Welfare, Republic of Korea (A080588-1122-1260200). The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

    Registered with ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01389882.

    View full text