LAUSR

OBJECTIVE  The study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of two different nasal high-flow rates for primary respiratory support in preterm neonates STUDY DESIGN:  In this single-center, double-blinded randomized controlled trial, preterm neonates ≥28 weeks of gestation with respiratory distress from birth were randomized to treatment with either increased nasal flow therapy (8-10 L/min) or standard nasal flow therapy (5-7 L/min). The primary outcome of nasal high-flow therapy failure was a composite outcome defined as the need for higher respiratory support (continuous positive airway pressure [CPAP] or mechanical ventilation) or surfactant therapy. RESULTS  A total of 212 neonates were enrolled. Nasal high-flow failure rate in the increased flow group was similar to the standard flow group (22 vs. 29%, relative risk = 0.81 [95% confidence interval: 0.57-1.15]). However, nasal flow rate escalation was significantly more common in the standard flow group (64 vs. 43%, p = 0.004). None of the infants in the increased flow group developed air leak syndromes. CONCLUSION  Higher nasal flow rate (8-10 L/min) when compared with lower nasal flow rate of 5 to 7 L/min did not reduce the need for higher respiratory support (CPAP/mechanical ventilation) or surfactant therapy in moderately and late preterm neonates. However, initial flow rates of 5 L/min were not optimal for most preterm infants receiving primary nasal flow therapy. KEY POINTS · Use of high nasal flows (8-10 L/min) did not reduce the need for higher respiratory support in moderately and late preterm infants.. · Nasal flow rate of 5 L/min was not optimal for most preterms with respiratory distress from birth.. · Careful patient selection and optimized flow settings could enhance nasal flow success in neonates..