I found none. In fact, I could find reports of its use in only about 5 neonates, and certainly no well done study assessing its safety or effectiveness. I, and others, had concerns that we might be giving too much oxygen and air flow to a baby, without knowing the consequences. At our next neonatologists' meeting we managed to nix further attempts to get a Vapotherm for our unit.
A few months later, reports about an unusual infection in neonates using the Vapotherm began to surface. Shortly afterwards, the company pulled the product and the use of the Vapotherm in neonatology vaporized. I felt relieved that we had never tried it, although it bothered me that one of my partners wanted to get it when there was so little data available about its use in newborns.
This was an example of neonatologists not using evidence based medicine. Rather than looking for well done studies that showed the safety and efficacy of the Vapotherm, too many physicians said, "Hey, that sounds like a good idea," and started using it based on that. Unfortunately, the history of neonatology is littered with examples of good ideas that turned out to be harmful: large amounts of oxygen, steroids for BPD, phenobarbital for prevention of bleeding into the brain, and so on.
I'm not sure why some neonatologists thought it so necessary to use the Vapotherm without waiting for better evidence. It's appropriate that we always look for better ways to treat the babies, but let's evaluate them correctly. I think some neonatologists - and physicians in general - just don't have the scientific discipline to wait to evaluate a new thing before using it. Maybe we just want to be the first on our block with the new gizmo, but it''s better to be later and sure than to be early and cause harm.