AzTrials
AzTrials

Neonatal Respiratory DistressTONIPEPNCT02030691

Tolerance of nHFPV Versus nCPAP in Neonatal Respiratory Distress

A study testing Nasal continuous airway positive pressure (nCPAP) and Nasal high frequency percussive ventilation (nHFPV) in people with Neonatal Respiratory Distress, run by University Hospital, Bordeaux at 1 site in France.

Completed

Finished. The study has ended and is not enrolling. Results may be posted on the official record.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

Respiratory distress is the main cause of morbimortality in preterm and term neonates. In most of the case, these babies required the use of positive end expiratory pressure (PEEP) delivered by a non invasive device. Nasal continuous airway positive pressure (nCPAP) is widely used in neonatal intensive care unit. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages Up to 30 minutes
Conditions the study is for
Neonatal Respiratory Distress
What is being tested?
Nasal continuous airway positive pressure (nCPAP) and Nasal high frequency percussive ventilation (nHFPV)
Type of treatment
Medical device
Could I receive a placebo?
No, everyone receives an active treatment
How many people
49 participants
Where
1 siteFrance
Study dates
May 2014to 7 Nov 2016
Phase
Interventional
Are there results?
None posted in the registry

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

  • Ages Up to 30 minutes
  • All sexes
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Child

Who may be able to join

  • Inborn neonate.
  • Delivered by vaginal delivery or caesarean section.
  • Gestational age greater than or equal to 33 weeks of gestation.
  • Birth weight > 1kg.
  • Respiratory distress with a Silverman score greater than or equal to 4 after 10 minutes of life.
  • Signed parental informed consent.

Who cannot join

  • Meconium aspiration syndrome.
  • Congenital anomalies such as heart anomalies, congenital cystic adenomatoid malformation, diaphragmatic hernia…

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country.

France1 site
  • Service de Néonatalogie - Maternité - Hôpital Pellegrin

    Bordeaux, Bordeaux, 33076

Other trials in France

About this study

Official title: Tolerance of Nasal High Frequency Percussive Ventilation Versus Nasal CPAP in Neonatal Respiratory Distress in Term and Preterm (> 33 Weeks of Gestation) Neonates

Respiratory distress is the main cause of morbimortality in preterm and term neonates. In most of the case, these babies required the use of positive end expiratory pressure (PEEP) delivered by a non invasive device. Nasal continuous airway positive pressure (nCPAP) is widely used in neonatal intensive care unit. Nasal high frequency percussive ventilation (nHFPV) can be used as non invasive device to deliver PEEP, and improved lung clearance.

We hypothesized that nHFPV can be used to deliver PEEP in preterm and term newborn with respiratory distress with the same tolerance as nCPAP. To compare the tolerance of these devices we used cerebral tissue oxygenation (rSO2c) measured by near infrared spectroscopy (NIRS).

Read the detailed description

The objective is to compare nHFPV versus nCPAP tolerance for providing PEEP in newborn respiratory distress.

High frequency percussive ventilation (HFPV) is a pressure limited, time-cycled, high-frequency mode of ventilation that delivers subphysiologic tidal volumes at rapid rates and that can be used via an endotracheal tube, a nasal probe or a face mask. In burned children, it has been shown to provide the same or improved oxygenation and ventilation at lower peak pressure when compared with conventional ventilation. In neonates, HFPV has been described in hyaline membrane disease and acute respiratory failure ventilation with improvement in oxygenation, significant decrease in PaCO2 and no change in central hemodynamics and we recently shown that nasal HFPV is more effective than nasal continuous positive airway pressure in transient tachypnea of the newborn. This stud is a cross-over clinical trial. For each patient enrolled, the 2 respiratory devices (nHFPV and nCPAP) were used one after the other for 15 minutes each. Randomization determines which device to use in first (group A nCPAP then nHFPV, group B (nHFPV then nCPAP). During the experiment, rSO2c is continuously recorded by NIRS, and oxygenation and capnia are monitored in a non invasive way by transcutaneous oxygen saturation and transcutaneous capnia measurement. Ventilators' setting (PEEP, FiO2) will be modified to achieve oxygen and capnia targets (SpO2 > 90%, and under 95% if FiO2>0.21, Capnia between 5 to 7 kPa). Duration of patient follow up is 30 minutes. After these 30 minutes, if PEEP is always needed, patients undergo nCPAP. If needed during the experiment, patients can receive mechanical ventilation (the criteria for mechanical ventilation are the same as those used in clinical practice).

Being tested
Nasal continuous airway positive pressure (nCPAP), Nasal high frequency percussive ventilation (nHFPV)
Keywords
Neonatal respiratory distress, nHFPV, nCPAP, cerebral tissue oxygenation, NIRS
Medical subject headings
Pulmonary Atelectasis

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • Nasal continuous airway positive pressure (nCPAP)Device

  • Nasal high frequency percussive ventilation (nHFPV)Device

Study groups in NCT02030691
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
nCPAP - nHFPVExperimentalEligible patient received after randomization nCPAP or nHFPV for 15 minutes then after the 15 minutes, they received the seconde non invasive device for 15 minutes. Study end 30 minutes after randomization or before if mechanical ventilation is required.
Receives: Device: Nasal continuous airway positive pressure (nCPAP); Device: Nasal high frequency percussive ventilation (nHFPV)
nHFPV - nCPAPExperimentalEligible patient received after randomization nCPAP or nHFPV for 15 minutes then after the 15 minutes, they received the seconde non invasive device for 15 minutes. Study end 30 minutes after randomization or before if mechanical ventilation is required.
Receives: Device: Nasal continuous airway positive pressure (nCPAP); Device: Nasal high frequency percussive ventilation (nHFPV)

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Measurement of cerebral tissue oxygenation (rSO2c) by near infrared spectroscopy (NIRS). We compared the mean of the variation of rSO2c during the last 5 minutes for each device (nHFPV and nCPAP).

    Measured: 30 minutes after the inclusion

Secondary outcomes (1)
  1. Measurement of transcutaneous capnia and oxygen saturation; variation of heart rate, breath rate and blood pressure; ventilators' setting (PEEP, FiO2).

    Measured: 30 minutes after the inclusion

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted8 Jan 2014 (estimated)
  2. Study startMay 2014
  3. Primary completion7 Nov 2016
  4. Study completion7 Nov 2016

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Interventional
Phase
Phase N/A
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomised
Intervention model
Crossover
Masking
None (open label)
Enrolment
49 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT02030691
Sponsor's protocol ID
CHUBX 2013/10
Other IDs
2013-A01399-36
Acronym
TONIPEP
Status last verified
Jul 2017
First submitted
7 Jan 2014
Last updated
18 Jun 2026
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
No

Publications

  • Renesme L, Dumas de la Roque E, Germain C, Chevrier A, Rebola M, Cramaregeas S, Benard A, Elleau C, Tandonnet O. Nasal high-frequency percussive ventilation vs nasal continuous positive airway pressure in newborn infants respiratory distress: A cross over clinical trial. Pediatr Pulmonol. 2020 Oct;55(10):2617-2623. doi: 10.1002/ppul.24935. Epub 2020 Jul 10.

    PubMed 32609946

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A study testing Nasal continuous airway positive pressure (nCPAP) and Nasal high frequency percussive ventilation (nHFPV) in people with Neonatal Respiratory Distress, run by University Hospital, Bordeaux at 1 site in France.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 6 inclusion and 2 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 18 Jun 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 1 site in France. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

Are results available for this study?

The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

Measurement of cerebral tissue oxygenation (rSO2c) by near infrared spectroscopy (NIRS). We compared the mean of the variation of rSO2c during the last 5 minutes for each device (nHFPV and nCPAP). (time frame: 30 minutes after the inclusion). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?

On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT02030691, which also lists 1 linked publication.

Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 18 Jun 2026.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in