Continuous Positive Airway Pressure vs. High Flow Nasal Cannula in children with acute severe or moderate bronchiolitis. A systematic review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare the safety and effectiveness of Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP) vs. High Flow Nasal Cannula (HFNC) to prevent therapeutic failure and the need of invasive ventilation in children with acute moderate-severe bronchiolitis.

DESIGN

A systematic review and meta-analysis.

SETTING

Medline, Embase, Lilacs, Cochrane and gray literature (May 2020) was performed.

PARTICIPANTS

Randomized clinical trials patients with moderate to severe bronchiolitis.

MAIN VARIABLES

Therapeutic failure, need for invasive ventilation, adverse events, length of PCCU and of hospital stay.

INTERVENTION

The quality of the studies was assessed with the Cochrane risk and bias tool. We conducted meta-analysis using fixed effect model and random effects model.

RESULTS

Three RCTs were included. Showed less risk of therapeutic failure with CPAP compared with HFNC (RR=0.7; 95%CI 0.5-0.99) developed hours later in patients with CPAP (MD=3.16; 95%CI 1.55-4.77). We did not find differences in other outcomes, such as need of invasive ventilation (RR=0.60; 95%CI 0.25-1.43), apnea (RR=0.40; 95%CI 0.08-1.99), or number of days in the intensive care unit (MD=0.02; 95%CI -0.38 to 0.42), and length of hospitalization (MD=-1.00; 95%IC -2.66 to 0.66). Adverse events (skin lesions) were more common with CPAP (RR 2.47; 95%CI 1.17-5.22).

CONCLUSIONS

In moderate/severe bronchiolitis CPAP demonstrated a lower risk of therapeutic failure and a longer time to failure. But more adverse events like nasal injury. There were no differences in other variables.

Continuous Positive Airway Pressure vs. High Flow Nasal Cannula in children with acute severe or moderate bronchiolitis. A systematic review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare the safety and effectiveness of Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP) vs. High Flow Nasal Cannula (HFNC) to prevent therapeutic failure and the need of invasive ventilation in children with acute moderate-severe bronchiolitis.

DESIGN

A systematic review and meta-analysis.

SETTING

Medline, Embase, Lilacs, Cochrane and gray literature (May 2020) was performed.

PARTICIPANTS

Randomized clinical trials patients with moderate to severe bronchiolitis.

MAIN VARIABLES

Therapeutic failure, need for invasive ventilation, adverse events, length of PCCU and of hospital stay.

INTERVENTION

The quality of the studies was assessed with the Cochrane risk and bias tool. We conducted meta-analysis using fixed effect model and random effects model.

RESULTS

Three RCTs were included. Showed less risk of therapeutic failure with CPAP compared with HFNC (RR=0.7; 95%CI 0.5-0.99) developed hours later in patients with CPAP (MD=3.16; 95%CI 1.55-4.77). We did not find differences in other outcomes, such as need of invasive ventilation (RR=0.60; 95%CI 0.25-1.43), apnea (RR=0.40; 95%CI 0.08-1.99), or number of days in the intensive care unit (MD=0.02; 95%CI -0.38 to 0.42), and length of hospitalization (MD=-1.00; 95%IC -2.66 to 0.66). Adverse events (skin lesions) were more common with CPAP (RR 2.47; 95%CI 1.17-5.22).

CONCLUSIONS

In moderate/severe bronchiolitis CPAP demonstrated a lower risk of therapeutic failure and a longer time to failure. But more adverse events like nasal injury. There were no differences in other variables.

Management of type 2 diabetes using non-insulin glucose-lowering therapies: a critical appraisal of clinical practice guidelines with the AGREE II instrument

AIM

Type 2 diabetes is a major global epidemic affecting over 400 million people worldwide. The objective of this systematic review was to provide an overview of recommendations from clinical practice guidelines (guidelines) addressing non-insulin based pharmacological management of among non-pregnant adults in an outpatient setting, and critically appraise their methodological development.

METHODS

We systematically searched MEDLINE and Embase databases, for relevant guidelines using the Ovid interface. We scanned the bibliographies of all eligible guidelines for additional relevant citations. Teams of two reviewers, independently and in duplicate, screened titles and abstracts and potentially eligible full text reports to determine eligibility and appraised the reporting quality of guidelines using the Advancing Guideline Development, Reporting and Evaluation in Health Care instrument II (AGREE II) instrument.

RESULTS

Our search yielded 11264 unique citations, of which 124 were retrieved for full-text review; 17 guidelines proved eligible. The highest scoring AGREE domain was 'clarity of presentation' (66%; range 7-92%), followed by 'scope and purpose' (58%; range 25-92%), 'editorial independence' (55%; range 0-91%), 'stakeholder involvement' (45%; range 11-90%) and 'rigour of development' (43%; range 4-92%). The poorest domain was 'applicability' (37%; range 6-84%). The guidelines authored by the World Health Organization group achieved the highest AGREE overall score.

CONCLUSIONS

Most of the guidelines provided recommendations with a local jurisdictional focus and showed significant variation in the quality. Nevertheless, only a small number of those scored well overall.