Skip to content

Surfactant Administration Methods in Preterm Infants With RDS: A Swedish Cohort Study

A Prospective Observational Study of Surfactant AdministrationMethods for Preterm Infants With Respiratory Distress SyndromeWith Long-term Follow-up in the Swedish Neonatal Quality Register

Status
Recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Observational
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT07550218
Enrollment
300
Registered
2026-04-24
Start date
2026-05-25
Completion date
2029-10-25
Last updated
2026-08-20

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Respiratory Distress Syndrome (& [Hyaline Membrane Disease]), Respiratory Distress Syndrome in Premature Infant, Respiratory Distress Syndrome (Neonatal), Respiratory Distress Syndrome of Newborn, Respiratory Distress Syndrome (RDS)

Keywords

Preterm infants, Premature infants, Surfactant therapy, Supraglottic Airway, Laryngeal Mask Airway, Intubation, LISA, INSURE, Less Invasive Surfactant Therapy, SALSA, Surfactant via Laryngeal or Supraglottic Airway, RDS, Respiratory Distress Syndrome

Brief summary

The goal of this observational study is to evaluate different methods of surfactant administration in preterm infants with respiratory distress syndrome (RDS). Preterm infants often have immature lungs and a deficiency of surfactant, a substance that helps keep the lungs open and supports oxygen exchange.Surfactant can be delivered to the lungs using different techniques, including INSURE (brief intubation), LISA (via a thin catheter), SALSA (via a laryngeal mask airway), and traditional administration via endotracheal intubation followed by mechanical ventilation. The main question this study aims to answer is:Which method of surfactant administration is associated with better clinical outcomes in preterm infants with RDS?The study will prospectively collect clinical data on infants receiving surfactant as part of standard care, with long-term follow-up using data from the Swedish Neonatal Quality Register. The results are intended to be used to inform the design of a future randomized multicenter study.

Detailed description

Background Complications of preterm birth are the leading cause of child mortality worldwide, with respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) as a major contributor. RDS is primarily caused by surfactant deficiency due to immature lungs. Early surfactant therapy, in combination with antenatal corticosteroids and non-invasive respiratory support such as continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP), is central to treatment. However, mechanical ventilation is associated with an increased risk of lung injury and bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD), prompting the development of less invasive surfactant administration techniques. Surfactant Administration Methods Three main methods are currently used in spontaneously breathing preterm infants. The INSURE method involves transient intubation for surfactant delivery followed by extubation. Less Invasive Surfactant Administration (LISA) uses a thin catheter inserted below the vocal cords under laryngoscopy, allowing continued spontaneous breathing. LISA is recommended as first-line treatment in European guidelines due to improved outcomes compared to INSURE. However, both methods require laryngoscopy and are technically demanding, with potential adverse events. Surfactant Administration via Laryngeal or Supraglottic Airways (SALSA) is a newer, less invasive technique that delivers surfactant via a supraglottic airway without laryngoscopy or passage through the vocal cords. Preliminary studies suggest comparable effectiveness to INSURE and CPAP, with potential safety advantages. Historically, SALSA has been limited to larger infants due to lack of appropriately sized devices, but newly available CE-marked devices now enable its use in extremely preterm infants. Rationale Despite widespread use of INSURE, LISA, and SALSA, there are no direct comparisons between LISA and SALSA, and real-world data on their implementation, safety, and outcomes are limited. In Sweden, these methods are used variably across neonatal units, and their relative use and outcomes have not been systematically evaluated. The availability of smaller supraglottic airway devices now allows evaluation of SALSA in the most vulnerable population, including extremely preterm infants. Aim The primary aim is to prospectively evaluate and compare the feasibility, safety, clinical performance, and procedural characteristics of surfactant administration methods (SALSA, LISA, INSURE) in spontaneously breathing preterm infants in a real-world clinical setting. Secondary aims include comparison with infants receiving surfactant via intubation followed by mechanical ventilation, evaluation of short- and long-term clinical outcomes, and generation of data to inform the design of a future randomized multicentre trial. Study Design This is a prospective, multicentre, observational study conducted in neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) in Region Västra Götaland (VGR), Sweden. No interventions are introduced, and all treatment decisions are made according to local clinical guidelines. Study Population Eligible participants are preterm infants (37 weeks' gestation) receiving their first surfactant treatment within 48 hours of birth due to suspected or confirmed RDS. Infants are included regardless of administration method. Data Collection and Follow-up Data are collected from routine clinical documentation, structured procedure forms, clinician surveys, and the Swedish Neonatal Quality Register (SNQ). Variables include perinatal factors, procedural details, respiratory outcomes, and morbidity. Infants are followed until discharge and, where applicable, at 2 and 5.5 years of age using SNQ data. Outcomes The primary outcome is treatment failure, defined as the need for mechanical ventilation or repeat surfactant administration within 72 hours. Secondary outcomes include changes in oxygenation, need for respiratory support, adverse events, procedural characteristics, and short- and long-term morbidity and mortality. Clinician-reported feasibility and ease of use are also assessed. Statistical Considerations All eligible infants will be included over a three-year period, with an expected sample size of approximately 300 infants. Analyses will include descriptive statistics, unadjusted comparisons, and multivariable regression models, with propensity score matching to address confounding. Ethics Ethical approval has been granted by the Swedish Ethical Review Authority. Written informed consent is obtained from caregivers for participation and for permission to collect and analyse observational data. Participation is voluntary and does not affect the infant's clinical care. Significance This study will provide real-world evidence on the use, safety, and outcomes of different surfactant administration methods, including the implementation of SALSA in extremely preterm infants. The results will inform clinical practice and provide essential data for the design of a future large-scale randomized multicentre trial.

Interventions

None listed

Sponsors

Vastra Gotaland Region
Lead SponsorOTHER_GOV
Göteborg University
CollaboratorOTHER

Study design

Observational model
COHORT
Time perspective
PROSPECTIVE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Patient has received surfactant by any administration method * Gestational age below 37 weeks' * First surfactant treatment given before 48 hours of age * Confirmed or suspected diagnosis of respiratory distress syndrome (RDS)

Exclusion criteria

• Not fulfilling above inclusion criteria

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Mechanical ventilation or repeat surfactant within 72 hours after first surfactant treatment delivered by LISA, SALSA or INSURE methodWithin 72 hours after first surfactant treatmentCategorical variable (Yes/No). Decision to initiate mechanical ventilation via intubation will be made at the discretion of the treating physician, guided by the local NICU criteria for mechanical ventilation. Data is extracted from medical records.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Total cumulative days of CPAP/NIPPVBefore discharge (about 2-20 weeks)Numerical variable (days). Data is collected from medical record.
Total cumulative days of mechanical ventilation (any mode)Before discharge (about 2-20 weeks)Numerical variable (days).
Total cumulative days of nasal high flow cannulaBefore discharge (about 2-20 weeks)Numerical variable (days). Data is collected from medical record.
Total cumulative days of any respiratory support (MV, CPAP/NIPPV, HNFC, or oxygen cannula)Before discharge (about 2-20 weeks)Numerical variable (days). Data is collected from medical record.
FiO2 requirement before repeat surfactantWithin 72 hours after first surfactant administrationNumerical variable.
Time to repeat surfactantBefore discharge (about 2-20 weeks)Numerical variable.
Time to mechanical ventilationBefore discharge (about 2-20 weeks)Numerical variable.
Total cumulative days of mechanical ventilation, conventionalBefore discharge (about 2-20 weeks)Numerical variable.
Total cumulative days of supplemental O2Before discharge (about 2-20 weeks)Numerical variable.
Systemic (oral or intravenous) steroid treatment due to lung diseaseBefore discharge (about 2-20 weeks)Age, date and duration.
DeathBefore discharge (about 2-20 weeks)Categorical (Yes/No)
Time to deathBefore discharge (about 2-20 weeks)Numerical variable.
Cause of deathBefore discharge (about 2-20 weeks)Categorical (Nominal).
Intraventricular heamorrhage (IVH)Before discharge (about 2-20 weeks)Categorical (Yes/No)
Highest grade of IVH, any sideBefore discharge (about 2-20 weeks)Categorical (ordinal)
Post-haemorrhagic ventricular dilatation (PHVD)Before discharge (about 2-20 weeks)Categorical (Yes/No)
Cystic periventricular leukomalacia (cPVL)Before discharge (about 2-20 weeks)Categorical (Yes/No)
Bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD)Before discharge (about 2-20 weeks)Categorical (Yes/No)
Severe BPDBefore discharge (about 2-20 weeks)Categorical (Yes/No).
PneumothoraxBefore discharge (about 2-20 weeks)Categorical (Yes/No)
Thoracic drainBefore discharge (about 2-20 weeks)Categorical (Yes/No)
Early Onset Sepsis, culture verifiedBefore discharge (about 2-20 weeks)Categorical (Yes/No)
Early Onset Sepsis, clinical diagnosisBefore discharge (about 2-20 weeks)Categorical (Yes/No).
Late Onset Sepsis, culture verifiedBefore discharge (about 2-20 weeks)Categorical (Yes/No).
Late Onset Sepsis, clinical diagnosisBefore discharge (about 2-20 weeks)Categorical (Yes/No).
Necrotizing Enterocolitis (NEC)Before discharge (about 2-20 weeks)Categorical (Yes/No)
NEC with perforationBefore discharge (about 2-20 weeks)Categorical (Yes/No)
NEC with surgical treatmentBefore discharge (about 2-20 weeks)Categorical (Yes/No)
Spontaneous intestinal perforationBefore discharge (about 2-20 weeks)Categorical (Yes/No)
Persistent ductus arteriosus (PDA), medical treatmentBefore discharge (about 2-20 weeks)Categorical (Yes/No)
PDA requiring, surgical treatmentBefore discharge (about 2-20 weeks)Categorical (Yes/No)
Examined for retinopathy of prematurity (ROP)Before discharge (about 2-20 weeks)Categorical (Yes/No)
Maximim ROP any side, gradeBefore discharge (about 2-20 weeks)Categorical (ordinal).
ROP ≥ grade 3Before discharge (about 2-20 weeks)Categorical (Yes/No)
ROP treatmentBefore discharge (about 2-20 weeks)Categorical (Yes/No)
Major neonatal morbidityBefore discharge (about 2-20 weeks)Categorical (Yes/No). BPD, IVH ≥3, cPVL, ROP ≥ 3, or NEC with perforation.
Weight at dischargeBefore discharge (about 2-20 weeks)Numerical variable. Grams.
Δ-weight at dischargeBefore discharge (about 2-20 weeks)Numerical variable. Grams.
Supplemental oxygen at discharge from hospitalBefore discharge (about 2-20 weeks)Categorical variable (Yes/No).
Duration of admission (in-patient care)Before discharge (about 2-20 weeks)Numerical variable. Days.
Asthma or obstructive respiratory symptoms during the past 12 monthsFollow-up at 2 years of ageCategorical (nominal).
Treatment for above obstructive symptoms during the past 12 monthsFollow-up at 2 years of ageCategorical (nominal).
Speech and language developmentFollow-up at 2 years of ageCategorical (ordinal)
Visual impairmentFollow-up at 2 years of ageCategorical (Yes/No)
Visual impairment, left; rightFollow-up at 2 years of ageCategorical (ordinal).
Hearing impairmentFollow-up at 2 years of ageCategorical (Yes/no)
Hearing impairment, left; rightFollow-up at 2 years of ageCategorical (ordinal)
Bayley score (all scores for all categories)Follow-up at 2 years of ageNumerical variable.
Assessed as normal development at follow-upFollow-up at 2 years of ageCategorical (Yes/No).
Assessed as not normal in following areaFollow-up at 2 years of ageCatetorical (nominal). Motor deficiency; Cognition, communication; Visual; Hearing
Seizure disorderFollow-up at 2 years of ageCategorical (ordinal)
HydrocephalusFollow-up at 2 years of ageCategorical (categorical)
Cerebral paresisFollow-up at 2 years of ageCategorical (Yes/No).
Gross motor function scaleFollow-up at 2 years of ageCategorical (ordinal).
Any new diagnoses after dischargeFollow-up at 2 years of ageICD- 10-codes.
Treatment for above during the past 12 monthsFollow-up at 5,5 years of ageCategorical (ordinal)
Visual impairment, leftFollow-up at 5,5 years of ageCategorical (ordinal).
Visual impairment, rightFollow-up at 5,5 years of ageCategorical (ordinal).
Hearing impairment, leftFollow-up at 5,5 years of ageCategorical (ordinal)
Hearing impairment, rightFollow-up at 5,5 years of ageCategorical (ordinal)
Manual abilities classification systemFollow-up at 5,5 years of ageNumerical variable.
WIPPSI, (all scores for all categories)Follow-up at 5,5 years of ageNumerical variable.
Strengths and difficulties questionnaire (SDQ) scoresFollow-up at 5,5 years of ageNumerical variable.
Bradycardia <100 bpm (any duration)During the procedure, an average of 5-10 minutesCategorical variable (Yes/No). Measured by pulse oximetry and noted by team performing procedure.
Oesophageal/upper airway injuryDuring and within an hour from procedure.Categorical (Yes/No). Observations of infant during and post-procedure. Details provided if present.
Bradycardia <60 bpm (any duration)During the procedure, an average of 5-10 minutesCategorical variable (Yes/No). Measured by pulse oximetry and noted by team performing procedure.
Desaturation to SpO₂ <80% lasting ≥30 seconds (single episode)During the procedure, an average of 5-10 minutesCategorical variable (Yes/No). Measured by pulse oximetry and noted by team performing procedure.
Duration of bradycardia <100 and <60 bpmDuring the procedure, an average of 5-10 minutesContinous variable. Measured by pulse oximetry.
Duration of desaturation <80%, <60% and <40%During the procedure, an average of 5-10 minutesContinuous variable (seconds). Measured by pulse oximetry.
Surfactant-like content in gastric aspirateDirectly after first surfactant administrationContinous variable, ml.
Proportion of administered surfactant recovered in gastric aspirateDirectly after first surfactant administrationContinuous variable (%). Fraction (calculated from residual aspirated surfactant and total dose (mL). Observed by clinical team during procedure and noted in CRF.
Surfactant refluxDirectly after first surfactant administrationCategorical variable (Yes/No). Clinical reflux of surfactant during procedure.
Δ-FiO₂: Hourly change in FiO₂ from pre-procedure to 12 hours post-procedureWithin 15 minutes before the procedure to 12 hours after first surfactant administrationContinuous variable.
Δ-SpO2/FiO2-ratio: Change in SpO₂/FiO₂ ratio from pre-procedure to 4 hours post-procedureWithin 15 minutes before the procedure to 4 hours after first surfactant administrationContinuous variable.
Early failure: Mechanical ventilation within 1 hour of first surfactant administrationWithin 1 hour after first surfactant administrationCategorical variable (Yes/no).
Mechanical ventilation within 72 hours of first surfactant administrationWithin 72 hours after first surfactant administrationCategorical variable (Yes/No). Decision to initiate mechanical ventilation via intubation will be made at the discretion of the treating physician, guided by the local NICU criteria for mechanical ventilation. Data is extracted from medical records.
Repeat surfactant within 72 hours of first surfactant administrationWithin 72 hours after first surfactant administrationCategorical variable (Yes/No). Decision to repeat surfactant will be made at the discretion of the treating physician, guided by the local NICU guideline. Data is extracted from medical records. When
Documented reason for mechanical ventilationWithin 72 hours after first surfactant administrationCategorical (Nominal).
Documented reason for repeat surfactantWithin 72 hours after first surfactant administrationCategorical (nominal).
Mechanical ventilation at any time during admission and durationBefore discharge (about 2-20 weeks)Categorical variable (Yes/No). Decision to initiate mechanical ventilation via intubation will be made at the discretion of the treating physician, guided by the local NICU criteria for mechanical ventilation.
FiO2 requirement at time of intubationWithin 72 hours after first surfactant administrationNumerical variable.

Countries

Sweden

Contacts

CONTACTAnders Elfvin, Professor
anders.elfvin@vgregion.se+46313438073
CONTACTMårten Larsson, M.D
marten.larsson@vgregion.se+46704240972
PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATORAnders Elfvin, Professor

Department of Neonatology, Queen Silvia Children's Hospital, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Region Västra Götaland, Sweden

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Aug 21, 2026