Randomized Comparison of Helmet CPAP Versus High-Flow Nasal Cannula Oxygen in Pediatric Respiratory Distress

[Non-invasive Mechanical Ventilation in Acute Respiratory Failure. Clinical Practice Guidelines - on behalf of the German Society of Pneumology and Ventilatory Medicine]

The guideline update outlines the advantages as well as the limitations of NIV in the treatment of acute respiratory failure in daily clinical practice and in different indications.Non-invasive ventilation (NIV) has a high value in therapy of hypercapnic acute respiratory failure, as it significantly reduces the length of ICU stay and hospitalization as well as mortality.Patients with cardiopulmonary edema and acute respiratory failure should be treated with continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) and oxygen in addition to necessary cardiological interventions. This should be done already prehospital and in the emergency department.In case of other forms of acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure with only mild or moderately disturbed gas exchange (PaO2/FiO2 > 150 mmHg) there is no significant advantage or disadvantage compared to high flow nasal oxygen (HFNO). In severe forms of ARDS NIV is associated with high rates of treatment failure and mortality, especially in cases with NIV-failure and delayed intubation.NIV should be used for preoxygenation before intubation. In patients at risk, NIV is recommended to reduce extubation failure. In the weaning process from invasive ventilation NIV essentially reduces the risk of reintubation in hypercapnic patients. NIV is regarded useful within palliative care for reduction of dyspnea and improving quality of life, but here in concurrence to HFNO, which is regarded as more comfortable. Meanwhile NIV is also recommended in prehospital setting, especially in hypercapnic respiratory failure and pulmonary edema.With appropriate monitoring in an intensive care unit NIV can also be successfully applied in pediatric patients with acute respiratory insufficiency.

High flow nasal cannula for respiratory support in term infants

BACKGROUND

Respiratory failure or respiratory distress in infants is the most common reason for non-elective admission to hospitals and neonatal intensive care units. Non-invasive methods of respiratory support have become the preferred mode of treating respiratory problems as they avoid some of the complications associated with intubation and mechanical ventilation. High flow nasal cannula (HFNC) therapy is increasingly being used as a method of non-invasive respiratory support. However, the evidence pertaining to its use in term infants (defined as infants ≥ 37 weeks gestational age to the end of the neonatal period (up to one month postnatal age)) is limited and there is no consensus of opinion regarding the safety and efficacy HFNC in this population.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the safety and efficacy of high flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy for respiratory support in term infants when compared with other forms of non-invasive respiratory support.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases in December 2022: Cochrane CENTRAL; PubMed; Embase; CINAHL; LILACS; Web of Science; Scopus. We also searched the reference lists of retrieved studies and performed a supplementary search of Google Scholar.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that investigated the use of high flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy in infants ≥ 37 weeks gestational age up to one month postnatal age (the end of the neonatal period).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial eligibility, performed data extraction, and assessed risk of bias in the included studies. Where studies were sufficiently similar, we performed a meta-analysis using mean differences (MD) for continuous data and risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous data, with their respective 95% confidence intervals (CIs). For statistically significant RRs, we calculated the number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB). We used the GRADE approach to evaluate the certainty of the evidence for clinically important outcomes.

MAIN RESULTS

We included eight studies (654 participants) in this review. Six of these studies (625 participants) contributed data to our primary analyses. Four studies contributed to our comparison of high flow nasal cannula (HFNC) oxygen therapy versus continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) for respiratory support in term infants. The outcome of death was reported in two studies (439 infants) but there were no events in either group. HFNC may have little to no effect on treatment failure, but the evidence is very uncertain (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.47 to 2.04; 3 trials, 452 infants; very low-certainty evidence). The outcome of chronic lung disease (need for supplemental oxygen at 28 days of life) was reported in one study (375 participants) but there were no events in either group. HFNC may have little to no effect on the duration of respiratory support (any form of non-invasive respiratory support with or without supplemental oxygen), but the evidence is very uncertain (MD 0.17 days, 95% CI -0.28 to 0.61; 4 trials, 530 infants; very low-certainty evidence). HFNC likely results in little to no difference in the length of stay at the intensive care unit (ICU) (MD 0.90 days, 95% CI -0.31 to 2.12; 3 trials, 452 infants; moderate-certainty evidence). HFNC may reduce the incidence of nasal trauma (RR 0.16, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.66; 1 trial, 78 infants; very low-certainty evidence) and abdominal overdistension (RR 0.22, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.71; 1 trial, 78 infants; very low-certainty evidence), but the evidence is very uncertain. Two studies contributed to our analysis of HFNC versus low flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy (LFNC) (supplemental oxygen up to a maximum flow rate of 2 L/min). The outcome of death was reported in both studies (95 infants) but there were no events in either group. The evidence suggests that HFNC may reduce treatment failure slightly (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.92; 2 trials, 95 infants; low-certainty evidence). Neither study reported results for the outcome of chronic lung disease (need for supplemental oxygen at 28 days of life). HFNC may have little to no effect on the duration of respiratory support (MD -0.07 days, 95% CI -0.83 to 0.69; 1 trial, 74 infants; very low-certainty evidence), length of stay at the ICU (MD 0.49 days, 95% CI -0.83 to 1.81; 1 trial, 74 infants; very low-certainty evidence), or hospital length of stay (MD -0.60 days, 95% CI -2.07 to 0.86; 2 trials, 95 infants; very low-certainty evidence), but the evidence is very uncertain. Adverse events was an outcome reported in both studies (95 infants) but there were no events in either group. The risk of bias across outcomes was generally low, although there were some concerns of bias. The certainty of evidence across outcomes ranged from moderate to very low, downgraded due to risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness, and inconsistency.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

When compared with CPAP, HFNC may result in little to no difference in treatment failure. HFNC may have little to no effect on the duration of respiratory support, but the evidence is very uncertain. HFNC likely results in little to no difference in the length of stay at the intensive care unit. HFNC may reduce the incidence of nasal trauma and abdominal overdistension, but the evidence is very uncertain. When compared with LFNC, HFNC may reduce treatment failure slightly. HFNC may have little to no effect on the duration of respiratory support, length of stay at the ICU, or hospital length of stay, but the evidence is very uncertain. There is insufficient evidence to enable the formulation of evidence-based guidelines on the use of HFNC for respiratory support in term infants. Larger, methodologically robust trials are required to further evaluate the possible health benefits or harms of HFNC in this patient population.

Systematic rotation versus continuous application of 'nasal prongs' or 'nasal mask' in preterm infants on nCPAP: a randomized controlled trial

To compare whether alternate rotation of nasal mask with nasal prongs every 8 h as compared to continuous use of either interface alone decreases the incidence of nasal injury in preterm infants receiving nasal Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (nCPAP). This was an open-label, three-arm, stratified randomized controlled trial where infants < 35 weeks receiving nCPAP were randomized into three groups using two different nasal interfaces (continuous prongs group, continuous mask group, and rotation group). All infants were assessed for nasal injury six hours post-removal of nCPAP using grading suggested by Fischer et al. The nursing care was uniform across all three groups. Intention-to-treat analysis was done. Fifty-seven infants were enrolled, with nineteen in each group. The incidence of nasal injury was 42.1% vs. 47.4% vs. 68.4% in the rotation group, continuous mask, and continuous prongs groups, respectively (P = 0.228). On adjusted analysis (gestational age, birth weight, and duration of nCPAP therapy), the incidence of nasal injury was significantly less in the rotation group as compared to continuous prongs group (Adjusted Odds Ratio [AOR], 95% confidence interval [CI]; 0.10 [0.01-0.69], P = 0.02) and a trend towards lesser nasal injury as compared to continuous mask group (AOR, 95% CI; 0.15 [0.02-1.08], P = 0.06). However, there was no significant difference in incidence of nasal injuries between continuous prongs versus continuous mask group (P = 0.60). The need for surfactant, nCPAP failure rate, duration of nCPAP, and common neonatal co-morbidities were similar across all three groups.   Conclusion: Systematic rotation of nasal mask with nasal prongs significantly reduced nasal injury among preterm infants on nCPAP as compared to continuous use of nasal prongs alone without affecting nCPAP failure rate.   Trial registration: CTRI/2019/01/017320, registered on 31/01/2019. What is Known: • Use of nasal mask as an interface for nasal Continuous Positive Airway Pressure decreases nasal injury as compared to nasal prongs. What is New: • Rotation of nasal prongs and nasal mask interfaces alternately every 8 h may reduce the nasal injury even further as compared to either interface alone.

Noninvasive Ventilation for Acute Respiratory Failure in Pediatric Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the use of noninvasive ventilation (NIV) for acute respiratory failure (ARF) in pediatric patients.

DATA SOURCES

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Clinical Trials, and Clinicaltrials.gov with a last update on July 31, 2022.

STUDY SELECTION

We included RCTs comparing NIV with any comparator (standard oxygen therapy and high-flow nasal cannula [HFNC]) in pediatric patients with ARF. We excluded studies performed on neonates and on chronic respiratory failure patients.

DATA EXTRACTION

Baseline characteristics, intubation rate, mortality, and hospital and ICU length of stays were extracted by trained investigators.

DATA SYNTHESIS

We identified 15 RCTs (2,679 patients) for the final analyses. The intubation rate was 109 of 945 (11.5%) in the NIV group, and 158 of 1,086 (14.5%) in the control group (risk ratio, 0.791; 95% CI, 0.629-0.996; p = 0.046; I2 = 0%; number needed to treat = 31). Findings were strengthened after removing studies with intervention duration shorter than an hour and after excluding studies with cross-over as rescue treatment. There was no difference in mortality, and ICU and hospital length of stays.

CONCLUSIONS

In pediatric patients, NIV applied for ARF might reduce the intubation rate compared with standard oxygen therapy or HFNC. No difference in mortality was observed.

Commentary on High-Flow Nasal Cannula and Continuous Positive Airway Pressure Practices After the First-Line Support for Assistance in Breathing in Children Trials

Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) and heated humidified high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) are commonly used to treat children admitted to the PICU who require more respiratory support than simple oxygen therapy. Much has been published on these two treatment modalities over the past decade, both in Pediatric Critical Care Medicine (PCCM ) and elsewhere. The majority of these studies are observational analyses of clinical, administrative, or quality improvement datasets and, therefore, are only able to establish associations between exposure to treatment and outcomes, not causation. None of the initial randomized clinical trials comparing HFNC and CPAP were definitive due to their relatively small sample sizes with insufficient power for meaningful clinical outcomes (e.g., escalation to bilevel noninvasive ventilation or intubation, duration of PICU-level respiratory support, mortality) and often yielded ambiguous findings or conflicting results. The recent publication of the First-Line Support for Assistance in Breathing in Children (FIRST-ABC) trials represented a major step toward understanding the role of CPAP and HFNC use in critically ill children. These large, pragmatic, randomized clinical trials examined the efficacy of CPAP and HFNC either for "step up" (i.e., escalation in respiratory support) during acute respiratory deterioration or for "step down" (i.e., postextubation need for respiratory support) management. This narrative review examines the body of evidence on HFNC published in PCCM , contextualizes the findings of randomized clinical trials of CPAP and HFNC up to and including the FIRST-ABC trials, provides guidance to PICU clinicians on how to implement the literature in current practice, and discusses remaining knowledge gaps and future research priorities.

High-flow nasal cannula improves hypoxemia in dogs failing conventional oxygen therapy

OBJECTIVE

A prospective clinical trial was performed to evaluate the efficacy and tolerance of high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) in dogs with hypoxemia.

ANIMALS

20 client-owned dogs failing conventional oxygen therapy (COT).

PROCEDURES

Patients admitted to the ICU for treatment of hypoxemic respiratory failure were enrolled in the study. PaO2, SPO2, respiratory rate (RR), and acute patient physiologic and laboratory evaluation scores were obtained at the time of COT failure and after initiation of HFNC. Complications and patient tolerance while receiving HFNC were also recorded.

RESULTS

Compared to COT, the median PaO2 and SO2 were significantly higher when dogs were receiving HFNC (60.8 vs 135.6 mm Hg and 90.7% vs 99.25%, respectively). Dogs receiving HFNC had a significant reduction in median RR as compared to dogs undergoing COT (52 vs 36 breaths per minute). After the initiation of HFNC, all dogs showed clinical improvement as measured by PaO2, SO2, and RR. Of 20 dogs, 6 ultimately failed HFNC and mechanical ventilation was recommended. Nine dogs undergoing HFNC survived to discharge, and acute patient physiologic and laboratory evaluation scores had a significant positive severity correlation with death. Complications included pneumothorax in 1 dog.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

COT has limited flow rates due to airway irritation caused by room temperature, nonhumidified oxygen. HFNC uses vapor humidification and heated oxygen, allowing for higher flow rates. In people, HFNC is used as escalation of oxygen therapy when COT fails. Dogs treated with HFNC had significant improvements in PaO2, SO2, and RR as compared to COT. HFNC is well tolerated and effective in treating hypoxemia in dogs.

Helmet-Noninvasive Ventilation for Hospitalized Critically Ill COVID-19 Patients: Has Vaccination and the New Variants Changed Evidence?

Noninvasive ventilation (NIV) is a technique for breathing support that significantly improves gas exchange and vital signs, reducing intubation and mortality rates. Helmets, unlike facemasks, allow for longer-term treatment and better ventilation, also being more cost-effective. As of today, we have found no reviews addressing this topic. This review aims to identify, map, and describe the characteristics of the use of noninvasive ventilation through helmet interface in critically ill COVID-19 adult patients hospitalized in acute care settings throughout the multiple moments that defined the COVID-19 pandemic. This scoping review will follow the methodology for scoping reviews proposed by JBI. A set of relevant electronic databases will be searched using terms such as COVID-19, helmet, and noninvasive ventilation. Two reviewers will independently perform the study selection regarding their eligibility. Data extraction will be accomplished using a researcher’s developed tool considering the review questions. Findings will be presented in tables and a narrative description that aligns with the review’s objective. This scoping review will consider any quantitative, qualitative, mixed-methods studies and systematic review designs for inclusion, focusing on the use of helmet on critically ill adult patients with COVID-19 hospitalized in acute care settings.

Oxygenation Performance of Different Non-Invasive Devices for Treatment of Decompression Illness and Carbon Monoxide Poisoning

Study Objective: Application of high concentrations of oxygen to increase oxygen partial pressure (pO2) is the most important treatment for patients with carbon monoxide intoxication or divers with suspected decompression illness. The aim of this study was to evaluate the oxygenation performance of various non-invasive oxygen systems.

Methods: The effect of different oxygen systems on arterial pO2, pCO2 and pH and their subjective comfort was evaluated in 30 healthy participants. Eight devices were included: nasal cannula, non-rebreather mask, AirLife Open mask, Flow-Safe II CPAP device, SuperNO₂VA nasal PAP device, all operated with 15 L/min constant flow oxygen; nasal high-flow (50 L/min flow, 1.0 FiO2), non-invasive positive pressure ventilation (NPPV, 12 PEEP, 4 ASB, 1.0 FiO2) and a standard diving regulator (operated with pure oxygen).

Results: Diving regulator, SuperNO₂VA, nasal high-flow and NPPV achieved mean arterial pO2 concentrations between 538 and 556 mm Hg within 5 minutes. The AirLife Open mask, the nasal cannula and the non-rebreather mask achieved concentrations of 348–451 mm Hg and the Flow-Safe II device 270 mm Hg. Except for the AirLife open mask, pCO2 decreased and pH increased with all devices. The highest pH values were observed with NPPV, diving regulator, Flow-Safe II and nasal high-flow but apparent hyperventilation was uncommon. The AirLife Open and the non-rebreather mask were the most comfortable, the SuperNO₂VA and the nasal cannula the most uncomfortable devices.

Conclusion: A standard diving regulator and the SuperNO₂VA device were equally effective in providing highest physiologically possible pO2 as compared to nasal high-flow and NPPV.

Helmet Ventilation for Pediatric Patients During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Narrative Review

The air dispersion of exhaled droplets from patients is currently considered a major route of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) transmission, the use of non-invasive ventilation (NIV) should be more cautiously employed during the COVID-19 pandemic. Recently, helmet ventilation has been identified as the optimal treatment for acute hypoxia respiratory failure caused by COVID-19 due to its ability to deliver NIV respiratory support with high tolerability, low air leakage, and improved seal integrity. In the present review, we provide an evidence-based overview of the use of helmet ventilation in children with respiratory failure.

Clinical review of High Flow Nasal Cannula and Continuous Positive Airway Pressure in pediatric acute respiratory distress

Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) causes much morbidity and mortality in children. In mild to moderate ARDS, non-invasive ventilation (NIV) is the treatment of choice. Recently, there are 2 kinds of NIV used Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP) or High Flow Nasal Cannula (HFNC). Both of them can be used in various respiratory distress and have different physiological mechanisms. The effectiveness to improve the clinical parameter, morbidity, and mortality are similar between CPAP and HFNC. However, HFNC application is more tolerated in acute respiratory distress in children, with less nasal injury, lower heart rate inflicted, and better comfort index score.

•

CPAP & HFNC widely used in pediatric acute respiratory distress.

•

Both modalities have a different characteristics, beneficial in certain condition.

•

The usage of each modalities depends on the causes of the respiratory distress.

Non-Invasive Ventilation Strategies in Children With Acute Lower Respiratory Infection: A Systematic Review and Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis

Background: Multiple non-invasive ventilation (NIV) modalities have been identified that may improve the prognosis of pediatric patients with acute lower respiratory infection (ALRI). However, the effect of NIV in children with ALRI remains inconclusive. Hence, this study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of various NIV strategies including continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP), high flow nasal cannula (HFNC), bilevel positive airway pressure (BIPAP), and standard oxygen therapy in children with ALRI and the need for supplemental oxygen. Methods: Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases were searched from inception to July 2021. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared different NIV modalities for children with ALRI and the need for supplemental oxygen were included. Data were independently extracted by two reviewers. Primary outcomes were intubation and treatment failure rates. Secondary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Pairwise and Bayesian network meta-analyses within the random-effects model were used to synthesize data. The certainty of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework. Results: A total of 21 RCTs involving 5,342 children were included. Compared with standard oxygen therapy, CPAP (OR: 0.40, 95% CrI: 0.16-0.90, moderate quality) was associated with a lower risk of intubation. Furthermore, both CPAP (OR: 0.42, 95% CrI: 0.19-0.81, low quality) and HFNC (OR: 0.51, 95% CrI: 0.29-0.81, low quality) reduced treatment failure compared with standard oxygen therapy. There were no significant differences among all interventions for in-hospital mortality. Network meta-regression showed that there were no statistically significant subgroup effects. Conclusion: Among children with ALRI and the need for supplemental oxygen, CPAP reduced the risk of intubation when compared to standard oxygen therapy. Both CPAP and HFNC were associated with a lower risk of treatment failure than standard oxygen therapy. However, evidence is still lacking to show benefits concerning mortality between different interventions. Further large-scale, multicenter studies are needed to confirm our results. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=172156, identifier: CRD42020172156.

Chorioamnionitis, Inflammation and Neonatal Apnea: Effects on Preterm Neonatal Brainstem and on Peripheral Airways: Chorioamnionitis and Neonatal Respiratory Functions

Background: The present manuscript aims to be a narrative review evaluating the association between inflammation in chorioamnionitis and damage on respiratory centers, peripheral airways, and lungs, explaining the pathways responsible for apnea in preterm babies born by delivery after chorioamnionitis. Methods: A combination of keywords and MESH words was used, including: "inflammation", "chorioamnionitis", "brainstem", "cytokines storm", "preterm birth", "neonatal apnea", and "apnea physiopathology". All identified papers were screened for title and abstracts by the two authors to verify whether they met the proper criteria to write the topic. Results: Chorioamnionitis is usually associated with Fetal Inflammatory Response Syndrome (FIRS), resulting in injury of brain and lungs. Literature data have shown that infections causing chorioamnionitis are mostly associated with inflammation and consequent hypoxia-mediated brain injury. Moreover, inflammation and infection induce apneic episodes in neonates, as well as in animal samples. Chorioamnionitis-induced inflammation favors the systemic secretion of pro-inflammatory cytokines that are involved in abnormal development of the respiratory centers in the brainstem and in alterations of peripheral airways and lungs. Conclusions: Preterm birth shows a suboptimal development of the brainstem and abnormalities and altered development of peripheral airways and lungs. These alterations are responsible for reduced respiratory control and apnea. To date, mostly animal studies have been published. Therefore, more clinical studies on the role of chorioamninitis-induced inflammation on prematurity and neonatal apnea are necessary.

Helmet continuous positive airway pressure vs. high flow nasal cannula oxygen in acute cardiogenic pulmonary oedema: a randomized controlled trial

AIMS 

Non-invasive ventilation represents an established treatment for acute cardiogenic pulmonary oedema (ACPO) although no data regarding the best ventilatory strategy are available. We aimed to compare the effectiveness of helmet CPAP (hCPAP) and high flow nasal cannula (HFNC) in the early treatment of ACPO.

METHODS AND RESULTS 

Single-centre randomized controlled trial of patients admitted to the emergency department due to ACPO with hypoxemia and dyspnoea on face mask oxygen therapy. Patients were randomly assigned with a 1:1 ratio to receive hCPAP or HFNC and FiO2 set to achieve an arterial oxygen saturation >94%. The primary outcome was a reduction in respiratory rate; secondary outcomes included changes in heart rate, PaO2/FiO2 ratio, Heart rate, Acidosis, Consciousness, Oxygenation, and Respiratory rate (HACOR) score, Dyspnoea Scale, and intubation rate. Data were collected before hCPAP/HFNC placement and after 1 h of treatment. Amongst 188 patients randomized, hCPAP was more effective than HFNC in reducing respiratory rate [-12 (95% CI; 11-13) vs. -9 (95% CI; 8-10), P < 0.001] and was associated with greater heart rate reduction [-20 (95% CI; 17-23) vs. -15 (95% CI; 12-18), P = 0.042], P/F ratio improvement [+149 (95% CI; 135-163) vs. +120 (95% CI; 107-132), P = 0.003] as well as in HACOR scores [6 (0-12) vs. 4 (2-9), P < 0.001] and Dyspnoea Scale [4 (1-7) vs. 3.5 (1-6), P = 0.003]. No differences in intubation rate were noted (P = 0.321).

CONCLUSION 

Amongst patients with ACPO, hCPAP resulted in a greater short-term improvement in respiratory and hemodynamic parameters as compared with HFNC.

TRIAL REGISTRATION 

Clinical trial submission: NMRR-17-1839-36966 (IIR). Registry name: Medical Research and Ethics Committee of Malaysia Ministry of Health. Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT04005092. URL registry: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04005092.

The use of head helmets to deliver noninvasive ventilatory support: a comprehensive review of technical aspects and clinical findings

A helmet, comprising a transparent hood and a soft collar, surrounding the patient’s head can be used to deliver noninvasive ventilatory support, both as continuous positive airway pressure and noninvasive positive pressure ventilation (NPPV), the latter providing active support for inspiration. In this review, we summarize the technical aspects relevant to this device, particularly how to prevent CO₂ rebreathing and improve patient–ventilator synchrony during NPPV. Clinical studies describe the application of helmets in cardiogenic pulmonary oedema, pneumonia, COVID-19, postextubation and immune suppression. A section is dedicated to paediatric use. In summary, helmet therapy can be used safely and effectively to provide NIV during hypoxemic respiratory failure, improving oxygenation and possibly leading to better patient-centred outcomes than other interfaces.

[Paediatric Life Support]

The European Resuscitation Council (ERC) Paediatric Life Support (PLS) guidelines are based on the 2020 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Science with Treatment Recommendations of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR). This section provides guidelines on the management of critically ill or injured infants, children and adolescents before, during and after respiratory/cardiac arrest.

European Resuscitation Council Guidelines 2021: Paediatric Life Support

These European Resuscitation Council Paediatric Life Support (PLS) guidelines, are based on the 2020 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Science with Treatment Recommendations. This section provides guidelines on the management of critically ill infants and children, before, during and after cardiac arrest.

Variation in Practice Related to the Use of High Flow Nasal Cannula in Critically Ill Children

OBJECTIVES

To determine current management of critically ill children and gather views regarding high flow nasal cannula therapy and to evaluate research priorities for a large prospective randomized controlled trial of noninvasive respiratory support in children.

DESIGN

Multinational cross-sectional questionnaire survey conducted in 2018.

SETTING

The sample included pediatric intensive care physicians in North and South America, Asia, Europe, and Australia/New Zealand.

MEASUREMENT

Questions consisted of: 1) characteristics of intensivists and hospital, 2) practice of high flow nasal cannula, 3) supportive treatment, and 4) research of high flow nasal cannula.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MAIN RESULTS

We collected data from 1,031 respondents; 919 (North America, 215; Australia/New Zealand, 34; Asia, 203; South America, 186; Europe, 281) were analyzed. Sixty-nine percent of the respondents used high flow nasal cannula in non-PICU settings in their institutions. For a case of bronchiolitis/pneumonia infant, 2 L/kg/min of initial flow rate was the most commonly used. For a scenario of pneumonia with 30 kg weight, more than 60% of the respondents initiated flow based on patient body weight; while, 18% applied a fixed flow rate. Noninvasive ventilation was considered as a next step in more than 85% of respondents when the patient is failing with high flow nasal cannula. Significant practice variations were observed in clinical practice markers used, flow weaning strategy, and supportive practices. Views comparing high flow nasal cannula to continuous positive airway pressure also noticeably varied across the respondents.

CONCLUSIONS

Significant practice variations including views of high flow nasal cannula compared to continuous positive airway pressure was found among pediatric intensive care physicians. To expedite establishment and standardization of high flow nasal cannula practice, research aimed at understanding the heterogeneity found in this study should be undertaken.

High-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy in children: a clinical review

High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) is a relatively safe and effective noninvasive ventilation method that was recently accepted as a treatment option for acute respiratory support before endotracheal intubation or invasive ventilation. The action mechanism of HFNC includes a decrease in nasopharyngeal resistance, washout of dead space, reduction in inflow of ambient air, and an increase in airway pressure. In preterm infants, HFNC can be used to prevent reintubation and initial noninvasive respiratory support after birth. In children, flow level adjustments are crucial considering their maximal efficacy and complications. Randomized controlled studies suggest that HFNC can be used in cases of moderate to severe bronchiolitis upon initial low-flow oxygen failure. HFNC can also reduce intubation and mechanical ventilation in children with respiratory failure. Several observational studies have shown that HFNC can be beneficial in acute asthma and other respiratory distress. Multicenter randomized studies are warranted to determine the feasibility and adherence of HFNC and continuous positive airway pressure in pediatric intensive care units. The development of clinical guidelines for HFNC, including flow settings, indications, and contraindications, device management, efficacy identification, and safety issues are needed, particularly in children.

[Factors associated to high-flow nasal cannula treatment failure in pediatric patients with respiratory failure in two pediatric intensive care units at high altitude]

INTRODUCTION

Acute respiratory failure is the leading cause of hospitalization in pediatrics. High-flow nasal cannulas (HFNCs) offer a new alternative, but the evidence and indications are still debated. The performance of HFNCs at high altitude has not been described to date.

OBJECTIVE

To describe the use of HFNCs in pediatric patients admitted with respiratory failure and explore the factors associated with treatment failure.

METHODOLOGY

A prospective cohort study was carried out in patients between 1 month and 18 years of age managed with HFNCs. The demographic and treatment response data were recorded at baseline and after 1, 6 and 24hours. The number of failures was determined, as well as the length of stay, complications and mortality. Patients with treatment failure were compared with the rest.

RESULTS

A total of 539 patients were enrolled. Infants (70.9%) of male sex (58.4%) and airway diseases such as asthma and bronchiolitis (61.2%) were more frequent. There were 53 failures (9.8%), with 21 occurring in the first 24hours. The median length of stay was 4 days (IQR 4); there were 5 deaths (0.9%) and 13 adverse events (epistaxis) (2.2%). Improvement was observed in vital signs and severity over time, with differences in the group that failed, but without interactions. The final logistic model established an independent relationship of failure between the hospital (OR 2.78, 95%CI 1.48-5.21) and the initial respiratory rate (OR 1.56, 95%CI 1.21-2.01).

CONCLUSIONS

HFNCs afford good clinical response, with few complications and a low failure rate. The differences found between institutions suggest a subjective relationship in the decision of therapy failure.

Efficacy of High-Flow Nasal Cannula vs Standard Oxygen Therapy or Nasal Continuous Positive Airway Pressure in Children with Respiratory Distress: A Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy of high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) oxygen therapy in providing respiratory support of children with acute lower respiratory infection (ALRI), hypoxemia, and respiratory distress.

STUDY DESIGN

We performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials that compared HFNC and standard flow oxygen therapy or nasal continuous positive airway pressure (nCPAP) and reported treatment failure as an outcome. Data were synthesized using Mann-Whitney U test.

RESULTS

Compared with standard oxygen therapy, HFNC significantly reduced treatment failure (risk ratio [RR] 0.49, 95% CI 0.40-0.60, P < .001) in children with mild hypoxemia (arterial pulse oximetry [SpO₂] >90% on room air). HFNC had an increased risk of treatment failure compared with nCPAP in infants age 1-6 months with severe hypoxemia (SpO₂ <90% on room air or SpO₂ >90% on supplemental oxygen) (RR 1.77, 95% CI 1.17-2.67, P = .007). No significant differences were found in intubation rates and mortality between HFNC and standard oxygen therapy or nCPAP. HFNC had a lower risk of nasal trauma compared with nCPAP (RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.16-0.77, P = .009).

CONCLUSIONS

Among children <5 years of age with ALRI, respiratory distress, and mild hypoxemia, HFNC reduced the risk of treatment failure when compared with standard oxygen therapy. However, nCPAP was associated with a lower risk of treatment failure than HFNC in infants age 1-6 months with ALRI, moderate-to-severe respiratory distress, and severe hypoxemia. No differences were found in intubation and mortality between HFNC and standard oxygen therapy or nCPAP.