scholarly journals High-flow oxygen nasal cannula for treating acute bronchiolitis in infants: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Medwave ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (04) ◽  
pp. e8190-e8190
Author(s):  
Fernando Tortosa ◽  
Ariel Izcovich ◽  
Gabriela Carrasco ◽  
Gabriela Varone ◽  
Pedro Haluska ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Confidence Interval ◽  
Treatment Failure ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
High Flow ◽  
Nasal Cannula ◽  
Low Flow ◽  
Acute Bronchiolitis ◽  
High Flow Oxygen ◽  
Flow Group

Introduction Oxygen therapy through a high-flow nasal cannula is thought to improve the work of breathing and the comfort of patients with acute bronchiolitis. It is widely used in hospital wards and critical care of pediatric patients. However, there is uncertainty on the magnitude of the effect on critical and important outcomes in these patients. Objectives The objective of this review is to evaluate the available evidence on the use of oxygen administered through high-flow cannula versus low-flow oxygen for the treatment of acute bronchiolitis in children under two years of age. Methodology We carried out a systematic review and a meta-analysis following the PRISMA standards for reporting. The search was carried out in electronic databases by two researchers independently. The evidence was summarized using the GRADE methodology. Results Six randomized and non-randomized clinical trials were included, including 1867 individuals younger than 24 months of age with acute bronchiolitis in pediatric emergency, hospitalization, and intensive care services. Mortality was not reported in the included studies. Treatment failure occurred in 108/933 in the high flow group and 233/934 in the low flow group (relative risk: 0.46; 95% confidence interval: 0.35 to 0.62), which shows 11.7% less treatment failure (95% confidence interval between 7.9% and 14.5% less) in the high flow group with a number needed to treat of 7.5 (95% confidence interval 6 to 10) with moderate certainty in the evidence. Conclusion The use of humidified and heated oxygen with high flow compared to oxygen at low flow is probably associated with decreased treatment failure in children younger than two years with acute bronchiolitis. There is uncertainty about the effect on hospitalization days and clinical progression.

scholarly journals Randomised controlled trial to assess the effectiveness of apnoeic oxygenation in adults using low-flow or high-flow nasal cannula with head side elevation versus usual care to prevent desaturation during endotracheal intubation in the emergency department (ApOxED): study protocol

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (11) ◽  
pp. e037964
Author(s):  
Shahan Waheed ◽  
Nazir Najeeb Kapadia ◽  
Muhammad Faisal Khan ◽  
Salima Mansoor Kerai ◽  
Ahmed Raheem ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Endotracheal Intubation ◽  
Direct Laryngoscopy ◽  
Oxygen Delivery ◽  
High Flow ◽  
Nasal Cannula ◽  
Low Flow ◽  
Usual Practice ◽  
High Flow Oxygen ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
Apnoeic Oxygenation

IntroductionApnoeic oxygenation is a process of delivering continuous oxygen through nasal cannula during direct laryngoscopy. The oxygen that is delivered through these nasal cannulas is either low flow or high flow. Although the effectiveness of apnoeic oxygenation has been shown through systematic reviews and randomised controlled trials, a comparison of high-flow versus low-flow oxygen delivery has not been tested through a superiority study design. In this study we propose to assess the effectiveness of giving low-flow oxygen with head side elevation versus high-flow oxygen with head side elevation against the usual practice of care in which no oxygen is provided during direct laryngoscopy.Methods and analysisThis will be a three-arm study instituting a block randomisation technique with a sample size of 46 in each arm (see table 1). Due to the nature of the intervention, no blinding will be introduced. The primary outcomes will be lowest non-invasive oxygen saturation measurement during direct laryngoscopy and during the 2 min after the placement of the tube and the first pass success rate. The intervention constitutes head side elevation up to 30° for improving glottis visualisation together with low-flow or high-flow oxygen delivery through nasal cannula to increase safe apnoea time for participants undergoing endotracheal intubation. Primary analysis will be intention to treat.Ethics and disseminationThe study is approved by the Ethical Review Committee of Aga Khan University Hospital (2019-0726-2463). The project is an institution University Research Committee grant recipient 192 002ER-PK. The results of the study will be disseminated among participants, patient communities and healthcare professionals in the institution through seminars, presentations and emails. Further, the findings will be published in a highly accessed peer-reviewed medical journal and will be presented at both national and international conferences.Trial registration numberClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT04242537).

Heated Humidified High-Flow Nasal Cannula for Preterm Infants: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (4) ◽  
pp. 298-306 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nigel Fleeman ◽  
Yenal Dundar ◽  
Prakesh S Shah ◽  
Ben NJ Shaw
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Preterm Infants ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
High Flow ◽  
Nasal Cannula ◽  
Respiratory Support ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
High Flow Nasal Cannula ◽  
Safe Alternative

AbstractBackgroundHeated humidified high-flow nasal cannula (HHHFNC) is gaining popularity as a mode of respiratory support. We updated a systematic review and meta-analyses examining the efficacy and safety of HHHFNC compared with standard treatments for preterm infants. The primary outcome was the need for reintubation for preterm infants following mechanical ventilation (post-extubation analysis) or need for intubation for preterm infants not previously intubated (analysis of primary respiratory support)MethodsWe searched PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of HHHFNC versus standard treatments. Meta-analysis was conducted using Review Manager 5.3.ResultsThe post-extubation analysis included ten RCTs (n = 1,201), and the analysis of primary respiratory support included ten RCTs (n = 1,676). There were no statistically significant differences for outcomes measuring efficacy, including the primary outcome. There were statistically significant differences favoring HHHFNC versus nasal cannula positive airway pressure (NCPAP) for air leak (post-extubation, risk ratio [RR] 0.29, 95 percent confidence interval [CI] 0.11 to 0.76, I2 = 0) and nasal trauma (post-extubation: 0.35, 95 percent CI 0.27 to 0.46, I2 = 5 percent; primary respiratory support: RR 0.52, 95 percent CI 0.37 to 0.74; I2 = 27 percent). Studies, particularly those of primary respiratory support, included very few preterm infants with gestational age (GA) <28 weeks.ConclusionsHHHFNC may offer an efficacious and safe alternative to NCPAP for some infants but evidence is lacking for preterm infants with GA ≤28 weeks.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document