Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41052898›Full record

Trial reportBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2025

Non-invasive high frequency oscillatory ventilation for primary respiratory support in extremely preterm infants: multicentre randomised controlled trial.

Yang Li, Xingwang Zhu, Ling-Jun Li, Long Chen, Qian Yang, Liping Xu, Wuhua Liang, Xinzhu Lin, Chuanfeng Li, Jiang Xue and 7 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05141435 (NHFOV vs nCPAP in Very Preterm Infants With Respiratory Distress Syndrome), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT05141435 nacompletednot on this map

NHFOV vs nCPAP in Very Preterm Infants With Respiratory Distress Syndrome: A Multi-center, Prospective, Randomized, Controlled Clinical Superior Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorJiulongpo No.1 People's HospitalRan2022 to 2024Enrolled360Conditionsto Test the Hypothesis That NHFOV is More Effective Than nCPAP in the Treatment of Respiratory Distress Syndrome (RDS) in Verypreterm NeonatesArmsinfants receive primary non-invasive respiratory support by mean of nCPAP, infants receive primary non-invasive respiratory support by mean of NHFOV
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

17 authors.

Yang LiDepartment of Neonatology, Ministry of Education Key Laboratory of Child Development and Disorders, National Clinical Research Center for Child Health and Disorders, China International Science and Technology Cooperation Base of Child Development and Critical Disorders, Children's Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China.
Xingwang ZhuDepartment of Neonatology, Women and Children's Hospital of Bishan, Chongqing, China.
Ling-Jun LiBia-Echo Asia Centre for Reproductive Longevity and Equality (ACRLE), Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore.
Long ChenDepartment of Neonatology, Women and Children's Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing Health Center for Women and Children, Chongqing, China.
Qian YangBia-Echo Asia Centre for Reproductive Longevity and Equality (ACRLE), Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore.
Liping XuZhangzhou Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University, Fujian, China.
Wuhua LiangDepartment of Neonatology, Women and Children's Health Hospital of Yulin, Guangxi, China.
Xinzhu LinDepartment of Neonatology, Maternal and Child Health Care Hospital of Xiamen, Fujian, China.
Chuanfeng LiDepartment of Neonatology, Women and Children's Health Hospital of Qujing, Yunan, China.
Jiang XueNeonatal Intensive Care Unit, the Second Hospital of Shandong University, Shandong, China.
Ling LiuDepartment of Neonatology, Guiyang Maternal and Child Health Care Hospital, Guiyang, Guizhou, China.
Xinnian PanDepartment of Neonatology, Maternal and Children Health Care Hospital of Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region, Guangxi, China.
Rong JuNeonatal Intensive Care Unit, the Women and Children's Center Hospital of Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
Xianglian PengHunan Maternal and Children Health Hospital, Hunan, China.
Wenyan TangJiangxi Maternal and Child Health Hospital, Jiangxi, China.
Yuan ShiDepartment of Neonatology, Ministry of Education Key Laboratory of Child Development and Disorders, National Clinical Research Center for Child Health and Disorders, China International Science and Technology Cooperation Base of Child Development and Critical Disorders, Children's Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China.ORCID 0000-0002-4571-4424
NHFOV study group

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo test the hypothesis that non-invasive high frequency oscillatory ventilation (NHFOV) is more efficacious than nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP) in reducing invasive mechanical ventilation as primary respiratory support for extremely preterm infants with respiratory distress syndrome.

designA multicentre, randomised controlled trial.

settingTwenty tertiary neonatal intensive care units in China.

participants342 extremely preterm infants (gestational age between 24 weeks +0 day and 28 weeks +6 days) with respiratory distress syndrome were enrolled in the study between August 2022 and August 2024.

interventionsParticipants were randomly allocated to receive NCPAP or NHFOV as primary respiratory support for respiratory distress syndrome.

main outcome measuresThe primary outcome was treatment failure, defined as the need for invasive mechanical ventilation within 72 hours after birth.

resultsTreatment failure within 72 hours occurred in 27 of` 170 infants (15.9%) in the NHFOV group and 48 of 172 infants (27.9%) in the NCPAP group (risk difference -12.0 percentage points, 95% confidence interval -20.7 to -3.4; P=0.007). Treatment failure within seven days was also lower in the NHFOV group (-12.5 percentage points, 95% confidence interval -21.9 to -3.2; P=0.008) compared with the NCPAP group. All observed associations remained significant after sensitivity analysis including study sites and antenatal steroid use. No significant differences were found in any other secondary outcomes between the two groups.

conclusionsNHFOV appeared superior to NCPAP in reducing the need for intubation when used as a primary respiratory support strategy in extremely preterm infants. Both techniques did not show significant differences in neonatal adverse events.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT05141435.

Indexed as

Continuous Positive Airway PressureHigh-Frequency VentilationInfant, Extremely PrematureNoninvasive VentilationRespiratory Distress Syndrome, NewbornChinaFemaleGestational AgeHumansInfant, NewbornIntensive Care Units, NeonatalMaleRespiration, ArtificialTreatment FailureTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID41052898
PMCPMC12498197

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

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.