Trial reportTrials2011
EXTUBATE: a randomised controlled trial of nasal biphasic positive airway pressure vs. nasal continuous positive airway pressure following extubation in infants less than 30 weeks' gestation: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.
Trial report in Trials, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Postextubation use of non-invasive respiratory support in preterm infants: a network meta-analysis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- Efficacy and safety of different noninvasive ventilation strategies for postextubation respiratory support in Neonatal Respiratory Distress Syndrome: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2024Pooled it
- Nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) versus nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP) for preterm neonates after extubation.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- [Predictors of extubation failure and reintubation in newborn infants subjected to mechanical ventilation].Revista Brasileira de terapia intensivaArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRespiratory distress syndrome remains a significant problem among premature infants. Mechanical ventilation through an endotracheal tube remains the mainstay of respiratory support but may be associated with lung injury and the development of chronic lung disease of prematurity. Efforts are needed to reduce the duration of mechanical ventilation in favour of less invasive forms of respiratory support and to improve rates of successful extubation.Non-invasive respiratory support has been demonstrated to be less injurious to the premature lung. Standard practice is to use nasal continuous positive airway pressure (n-CPAP) following extubation to support the baby's breathing. Many clinicians also use nasal biphasic positive airway pressure (n-BiPAP) in efforts to improve rates of successful extubation. However, there is currently no evidence that this confers any advantage over conventional nasal continuous positive airway pressure.
methodsWe propose an unblinded multi-centre randomised trial comparing n-CPAP with n-BiPAP in babies born before 30 weeks' gestation and less than two weeks old. Babies with congenital abnormalities and severe intra-ventricular haemorrhage will be excluded. 540 babies admitted to neonatal centres in England will be randomised at the time of first extubation attempt. The primary aim of this study is to compare the rate of extubation failure within 48 hours following the first attempt at extubation. The secondary aims are to compare the effect of n-BiPAP and n-CPAP on the following outcomes: 1. Maintenance of successful extubation for 7 days post extubation 2. Oxygen requirement at 28 days of age and at 36 weeks' corrected gestational age 3. Total days on ventilator, n-CPAP/n-BiPAP 4. Number of ventilator days following first extubation attempt 5. pH and partial pressure of carbon dioxide in the first post extubation blood gas 6. Duration of hospital stay 7. Rate of abdominal distension requiring cessation of feeds 8. Rate of apnoea and bradycardia 9. The age at transfer back to referral centre in days The trial will determine whether n-BiPAP is safe and superior to n-CPAP in preventing extubation failure in babies born before 30 weeks' gestation and less than two weeks old. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN: ISRCTN18921778.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.