High-Flow Nasal Cannula versus Continuous Positive Airway Pressure in Critical Bronchiolitis: A Randomized Controlled Pilot

Severe respiratory syncytial virus infection in children: burden, management, and emerging therapies

The global burden of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) lower respiratory tract infection (LRTI) in young children is high. The RSV prevention strategies approved in 2023 will be essential to lowering the global disease burden. In this Series paper, we describe clinical presentation, burden of disease, hospital management, emerging therapies, and targeted prevention focusing on developments and groundbreaking publications for RSV. We conducted a systematic search for literature published in the past 15 years and used a non-systematic approach to analyse the results, prioritising important papers and the most recent reviews per subtopic. Annually, 33 million episodes of RSV LRTI occur in children younger than 5 years, resulting in 3·6 million hospitalisations and 118 200 deaths. RSV LRTI is a clinical diagnosis but a clinical case definition and universal clinical tool to predict severe disease are non-existent. The advent of molecular point-of-care testing allows rapid and accurate confirmation of RSV infection and could reduce antibiotic use. There is no evidence-based treatment of RSV, only supportive care. Despite widespread use, evidence for high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) therapy is insufficient and increased paediatric intensive care admissions and intubation indicate the need to remove HFNC therapy from standard care. RSV is now a vaccine-preventable disease in young children with a market-approved long-acting monoclonal antibody and a maternal vaccine targeting the RSV prefusion protein. To have a high impact on life-threatening RSV infection, infants at high risk, especially in low-income and middle-income countries, should be prioritised as an interim strategy towards universal immunisation. The implementation of RSV preventive strategies will clarify the full burden of RSV infection. Vaccine probe studies can address existing knowledge gaps including the effect of RSV prevention on transmission dynamics, antibiotic misuse, the respiratory microbiome composition, and long-term sequalae.

"Comparison between high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) therapy and noninvasive ventilation (NIV) in children with acute respiratory failure by bronchiolitis: a randomized controlled trial"

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study was to compare HFNC therapy to noninvasive ventilation (NIV/BiPAP) in children with bronchiolitis who developed respiratory failure. We hypothesized that HFNC therapy would not be inferior to NIV.

METHODS

This was a noninferiority open-label randomized single-center clinical trial conducted at a tertiary Brazilian hospital. Children under 2 years of age with no chronic conditions admitted for bronchiolitis that progressed to mild to moderate respiratory distress (Wood-Downes-Férres score < 8) were randomized to either the HFNC group or NIV (BiPAP) group through sealed envelopes. Vital signs, FiO2, Wood-Downes-Férres score and HFNC/NIV parameters were recorded up to 96 h after therapy initiation. Children who developed respiratory failure despite receiving initial therapy were intubated. Crossover was not allowed. The primary outcome analyzed was invasive mechanical ventilation requirement. The secondary outcomes were sedation usage, invasive mechanical ventilation duration, the PICU LOS, the hospital LOS, and mortality rate.

RESULTS

A total of 126 patients were allocated to the NIV group (132 randomized and 6 excluded), and 126 were allocated to the HFNC group (136 randomized and 10 excluded). The median age was 2.5 (1-6) months in the NIV group and 3 (2-7) months in the HFNC group (p = 0,07). RSV was the most common virus isolated in both groups (72% vs. 71.4%, NIV and HFNC, respectively). Thirty-seven patients were intubated in the NIV group and 29 were intubated in the HFNC group (29% vs. 23%, p = 0.25). According to the Farrington-Manning test, with a noninferiority margin of 15%, the difference was 6.3% in favor of HFNC therapy (95% confidence interval: -4.5 to 17.1%, p < 0.0001). There was no significant difference in the PICU LOS or sedation duration. Sedation requirement, hospital LOS and invasive mechanical ventilation duration were lower in the HFNC group.

CONCLUSION

HFNC therapy is noninferior to NIV in infants admitted with mild to moderate respiratory distress caused by bronchiolitis that progresses to respiratory failure.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS

U1111-1262-1740; RBR-104z966s. Registered 03/01/2023 (retrospectively registered). ReBEC: https://ensaiosclinicos.gov.br/rg/RBR-104z966s .

High-Flow Nasal Cannula Versus Nasal Prong Bubble Continuous Positive Airway Pressure in Children With Moderate to Severe Acute Bronchiolitis: A Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVES

To compare high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) versus nasal prong bubble continuous positive airway pressure (b-CPAP) in children with moderate to severe acute bronchiolitis.

DESIGN

A randomized controlled trial was carried out from August 2019 to February 2022. (Clinical Trials Registry of India number CTRI/2019/07/020402).

SETTING

Pediatric emergency ward and ICU within a tertiary care center in India.

PATIENTS

Children 1-23 months old with moderate to severe acute bronchiolitis.

INTERVENTION

Comparison of HFNC with b-CPAP, using a primary outcome of treatment failure within 24 hours of randomization, as defined by any of: 1) a 1-point increase in modified Wood's clinical asthma score (m-WCAS) above baseline, 2) a rise in respiratory rate (RR) greater than 10 per minute from baseline, and 3) escalation in respiratory support. The secondary outcomes were success rate after crossover, if any, need for mechanical ventilation (invasive/noninvasive), local skin lesions, length of hospital stay, and complications.

RESULTS

In 118 children analyzed by intention-to-treat, HFNC ( n = 59) versus b-CPAP ( n = 59) was associated with a lower failure rate (23.7% vs. 42.4%; relative risk [95% CI], RR 0.56 [95% CI, 0.32-0.97], p = 0.031). The Cox proportion model confirmed a lower hazard of treatment failure in the HFNC group (adjusted hazard ratio 0.48 [95% CI, 0.25-0.94], p = 0.032). No crossover was noted. A lower proportion escalated to noninvasive ventilation in the HFNC group (15.3%) versus the b-CPAP group (15.3% vs. 39% [RR 0.39 (95% CI, 0.20-0.77)], p = 0.004). The HFNC group had a longer median (interquartile range) duration of oxygen therapy (4 [3-6] vs. 3 [3-5] d; p = 0.012) and hospital stay (6 [5-8.5] vs. 5 [4-7] d, p = 0.021). No significant difference was noted in other secondary outcomes.

CONCLUSION

In children aged one to 23 months with moderate to severe acute bronchiolitis, the use of HFNC therapy as opposed to b-CPAP for early respiratory support is associated with a lower failure rate and, secondarily, a lower risk of escalation to mechanical ventilation.

Bronchiolitis: evidence-based management in high-risk infants in the intensive care setting

AIM

Systematically review the management of infants with severe bronchiolitis in a paediatric intensive care unit (PICU) setting with a focus on high-risk infants to identify gaps in evidence-based knowledge.

METHODS

This systematic review utilised Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) to examine the literature on the PICU management of bronchiolitis in infants <24 months old. Three databases, Embase, PubMed and Medline, were searched and higher levels of evidence I, II and III were included.

RESULTS

There were 455 papers reviewed and 26 met the inclusion criteria. Furthermore, 19 of these studied respiratory interventions such as positive airway pressure and oxygen delivery. The remaining 7 examined: erythropoietin, caffeine, dexamethasone, protein supplementation, ribavirin, respiratory syncytial virus immune globulin, or diuretic therapy. Of the 26 studies, 20 excluded infants with high-risk conditions. Therapies showing favourable outcomes included Heliox, prophylactic dexamethasone pre-extubation, protein supplementation, and diuretic use.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical trials for bronchiolitis management frequently exclude high-risk children. Innovative study design in the future may improve access to clinical trials for the management of bronchiolitis in high-risk infants in a PICU setting.

IMPACT

Clinical trials for bronchiolitis management frequently exclude high-risk children. We review the evidence base for the management of an under-investigated patient demographic in the setting of acute bronchiolitis. Randomised controlled trials are needed to determine the efficacy of management strategies for bronchiolitis in high-risk infants in a paediatric intensive care setting.

Effectiveness of high flow nasal Cannula (HFNC) therapy compared to standard oxygen therapy (SOT) and continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) in bronchiolitis

High Flow Nasal Cannula therapy (HFNC) is a form of respiratory support for bronchiolitis. Recent evidence confirms HFNC reduces the risk of treatment escalation by nearly half (45%) compared to standard oxygen therapy (SOT), although most patients (75%) with mild-moderate respiratory distress manage well on SOT. The majority of children (60%) failing SOT respond well to HFNC making rescue use of HFNC a more cost-effective approach compared to its first-line use. HFNC is compared toCPAP in the setting of moderate to severe bronchiolitis. Patients on HFNC have a slightly elevated risk of treatment failure especially in severe bronchiolitis, but this does not translate to a significant difference in patient or healthcare centred outcomes. HFNC has improved tolerance, a lower complication rate and is more easily available in peripheral hospitals. It is therefore the preferred first line option followed by rescue CPAP. HFNC is clinically effective and safe to use in bronchiolitis of all severities.

High-flow nasal cannula therapy for infants with bronchiolitis

BACKGROUND

Bronchiolitis is a common lower respiratory tract illness, usually of viral aetiology, affecting infants younger than 24 months of age and is the most common cause of hospitalisation of infants. It causes airway inflammation, mucus production and mucous plugging, resulting in airway obstruction. Effective pharmacotherapy is lacking and bronchiolitis is a major cause of morbidity and mortality. Conventional treatment consists of supportive therapy in the form of fluids, supplemental oxygen, and respiratory support. Traditionally, oxygen delivery is as a dry gas at 100% concentration via low-flow nasal prongs. However, the use of heated, humidified, high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) therapy enables delivery of higher inspired gas flows of an air/oxygen blend, at 2 to 3 L/kg per minute up to 60 L/min in children. It can provide some level of continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) to improve ventilation in a minimally invasive manner. This may reduce the need for invasive respiratory support, thus potentially lowering costs, with clinical advantages and fewer adverse effects.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of HFNC therapy compared with conventional respiratory support in the treatment of infants with bronchiolitis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, LILACS, and Web of Science (from June 2013 to December 2022). In addition, we consulted ongoing trial registers and experts in the field to identify ongoing studies, checked reference lists of relevant articles, and searched for conference abstracts. Date restrictions were imposed such that we only searched for studies published after the original version of this review.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs that assessed the effects of HFNC (delivering oxygen or oxygen/room air blend at flow rates greater than 4 L/minute) compared to conventional treatment in infants (< 24 months) with a clinical diagnosis of bronchiolitis.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently used a standard template to assess trials for inclusion and extract data on study characteristics, risk of bias elements, and outcomes. We contacted trial authors to request missing data. Outcome measures included the need for invasive respiratory support and time until discharge, clinical severity measures, oxygen saturation, duration of oxygen therapy, and adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

In this update we included 15 new RCTs (2794 participants), bringing the total number of RCTs to 16 (2813 participants). Of the 16 studies, 11 compared high-flow to low-flow, and five compared high-flow to CPAP. These studies included infants less than 24 months of age as stated in our selection criteria. There were no significant differences in sex. We found that when comparing high-flow to low-flow oxygen therapy for infants with bronchiolitis there may be a reduction in the total length of hospital stay (mean difference (MD) -0.65 days, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.23 to -0.06; P < 0.00001, I2 = 89%; 7 studies, 1951 participants; low-certainty evidence). There may also be a reduction in the duration of oxygen therapy (MD -0.59 days, 95% CI -1 to -0.18; P < 0.00001, I2 = 86%; 7 studies, 2132 participants; low-certainty evidence). We also found that there was probably an improvement in respiratory rate at one and 24 hours, and heart rate at one, four to six, and 24 hours in those receiving high-flow oxygen therapy when compared to pre-intervention baselines. There was also probably a reduced risk of treatment escalation in those receiving high-flow when compared to low-flow oxygen therapy (risk ratio (RR) 0.55, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.79; P = 0.001, I2 = 43%; 8 studies, 2215 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). We found no difference in the incidence of adverse events (RR 1.2, 95% CI 0.38 to 3.74; P = 0.76, I2 = 26%; 4 studies, 1789 participants; low-certainty evidence) between the two groups. The lack of comparable outcomes in studies comparing high-flow and CPAP, as well as the small numbers of participants, limited our ability to perform meta-analysis on this group.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

High-flow nasal cannula therapy may have some benefits over low-flow oxygen for infants with bronchiolitis in terms of a greater improvement in respiratory and heart rates, as well as a modest reduction in the length of hospital stay and duration of oxygen therapy, with a reduced incidence of treatment escalation. There does not appear to be a difference in the number of adverse events. Further studies comparing high-flow nasal cannula therapy and CPAP are required to demonstrate the efficacy of one modality over the other. A standardised clinical definition of bronchiolitis, as well as the use of a validated clinical severity score, would allow for greater and more accurate comparison between studies.

Bubble Continuous Positive Airway Pressure Oxygen Therapy in Children Under Five Years of Age with Respiratory Distress in Pediatric Intensive Care Unit

Background

Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) has been used in children with bronchiolitis for a long time. Currently in the low-resource settings, the method of providing oxygen therapy via bubble CPAP (bCPAP) to children with respiratory distress is not standardized and the existing low-flow oxygen therapy has a high mortality rate.

Objectives

To study the effectiveness and safety of bCPAP as a respiratory support in children with respiratory distress.

Materials and methods

This prospective observational study was conducted in a tertiary care pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) over a period of 3 months. Children with respiratory distress were administered with bCPAP oxygen therapy. Baseline demographic data, such as age, sex, weight, severity of illness was collected. Changes in heart rate, respiratory rate, saturation, respiratory distress score and failure rate after bCPAP therapy were studied.

Results

During the study period, 30 children were recruited. Most common cause of respiratory distress requiring bCPAP was pneumonia (66.7%) followed by pleural effusion (20%) and bronchiolitis (13.3%). The median (IQR) CPAP duration and PICU stay in the study was 48 hours (27-48) and 4 days (4-8), respectively. Heart rate and respiratory rate, respiratory distress score improved significantly after CPAP therapy (p < 0.05). CPAP therapy failed in one child and required invasive ventilation. We did not observe any complications due to bCPAP therapy.

Conclusion

The use of bCPAP in the treatment of respiratory distress is safe and effective.

How to cite this article

Lalitha AV, Pujari CG, Raj JM. Bubble Continuous Positive Airway Pressure Oxygen Therapy in Children Under Five Years of Age with Respiratory Distress in Pediatric Intensive Care Unit. Indian J Crit Care Med 2023;27(11):847-854.

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.

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.

High-Flow Oxygen and Other Noninvasive Respiratory Support Therapies in Bronchiolitis: Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analyses

OBJECTIVES

We present a systematic review on the effectiveness of noninvasive respiratory support techniques in bronchiolitis.

DATA SOURCES

Systematic review with pairwise meta-analyses of all studies and network meta-analyses of the clinical trials.

STUDY SELECTION

Patients below 24 months old with bronchiolitis who require noninvasive respiratory support were included in randomized controlled trials (RCTs), non-RCT, and cohort studies in which high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) was compared with conventional low-flow oxygen therapy (LFOT) and/or noninvasive ventilation (NIV).

DATA EXTRACTION

Emergency wards and hospitalized patients with bronchiolitis.

DATA SYNTHESIS

A total of 3,367 patients were analyzed in 14 RCTs and 8,385 patients in 14 non-RCTs studies. Only in nonexperimental studies, HFNC is associated with a lower risk of invasive mechanical ventilation (MV) than NIV (odds ratio, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.42-0.58), with no differences in experimental studies. There were no differences between HFNC and NIV in other outcomes. HFNC is more effective than LFOT in reducing oxygen days and treatment failure. In the network meta-analyses of clinical trials, NIV was the most effective intervention to avoid invasive MV (surface under the cumulative ranking curve [SUCRA], 57.03%) and to reduce days under oxygen therapy (SUCRA, 79.42%), although crossover effect estimates between interventions showed no significant differences. The included studies show methodological heterogeneity, but it is only statistically significant for the reduction of days of oxygen therapy and length of hospital stay.

CONCLUSIONS

Experimental evidence does not suggest that high-flow oxygen therapy has advantages over LFOT as initial treatment nor over NIV as a rescue treatment.

Clinical practice guidelines: management of severe bronchiolitis in infants under 12 months old admitted to a pediatric critical care unit

PURPOSE

We present guidelines for the management of infants under 12 months of age with severe bronchiolitis with the aim of creating a series of pragmatic recommendations for a patient subgroup that is poorly individualized in national and international guidelines.

METHODS

Twenty-five French-speaking experts, all members of the Groupe Francophone de Réanimation et Urgence Pédiatriques (French-speaking group of paediatric intensive and emergency care; GFRUP) (Algeria, Belgium, Canada, France, Switzerland), collaborated from 2021 to 2022 through teleconferences and face-to-face meetings. The guidelines cover five areas: (1) criteria for admission to a pediatric critical care unit, (2) environment and monitoring, (3) feeding and hydration, (4) ventilatory support and (5) adjuvant therapies. The questions were written in the Patient-Intervention-Comparison-Outcome (PICO) format. An extensive Anglophone and Francophone literature search indexed in the MEDLINE database via PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane and Embase was performed using pre-established keywords. The texts were analyzed and classified according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. When this method did not apply, an expert opinion was given. Each of these recommendations was voted on by all the experts according to the Delphi methodology.

RESULTS

This group proposes 40 recommendations. The GRADE methodology could be applied for 17 of them (3 strong, 14 conditional) and an expert opinion was given for the remaining 23. All received strong approval during the first round of voting.

CONCLUSION

These guidelines cover the different aspects in the management of severe bronchiolitis in infants admitted to pediatric critical care units. Compared to the different ways to manage patients with severe bronchiolitis described in the literature, our original work proposes an overall less invasive approach in terms of monitoring and treatment.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of efficacy and safety of continuous positive airways pressure versus high flow oxygen cannula in acute bronchiolitis

INTRODUCTION

There are a trend towards increasing use of High-Flow Nasal Cannula (HFNC), outside of paediatric intensive care unit. Give this trend is necessary to update the actual evidence and to assess available published literature to determinate the efficacy of HFNC over Continuous Positive Air Pressure (CPAP) as treatment for children with severe bronchiolitis.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, and COCHRANE Central, and gray literature in clinical trials databases ( www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov ), from inception to June 2022. The inclusion criteria for the literature were randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that included children < 2 years old, with acute moderate or severe bronchiolitis. All study selection and data extractions are performed independently by two reviewers.

RESULTS

The initial searches including 106 records. Only five randomized controlled trial that met the inclusion criteria were included in meta-analysis. The risk of invasive mechanical ventilation was not significantly different in CPAP group and HFNC group [OR: 1.18, 95% CI (0.74, 1.89), I² = 0%] (very low quality). The risk of treatment failure was less significantly in CPAP group than HFNC group [OR: 0.51, 95% CI (0.36, 0.75), I² = 0%] (very low quality).

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, there was no significant difference between HFNC and CPAP in terms of risk of invasive mechanical ventilation. CPAP reduces de risk of therapeutic failure with a highest risk of non severe adverse events. More trials are needed to confirm theses results.

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.

Systematic review and cost-utility of high flow nasal cannula versus continuous positive airway pressure in children with acute severe or moderate bronchiolitis in Colombia

BACKGROUND

Nasal Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP) and High-Flow Nasal Cannula (HFNC) have emerged as alternatives to orotracheal intubation and conventional invasive ventilation in patients with moderate to severe bronchiolitis. This study aims to evaluate the evidence and the cost-utility of HFNC compared to CPAP in infants with moderate-severe bronchiolitis in Colombia.

METHODS

The search includes electronic databases such as Pubmed, ScienceDirect, and Embase. Through inclusion and exclusion criteria, screen randomized controlled trials. A decision tree model was used to estimate the cost-utility of CPAP compared with HFNC in infants with moderate-severe bronchiolitis. Sensitivity analysis of transition probabilities, utilities, and cost was carried out.

RESULTS

Incorporate five studies that meet the criteria. The risk of intubation rate in the patients with CPAP is lower than HFNC (relative risk 0.62; 95% confidence interval 0.46-0.84; I2  = 0%) The base-case analysis showed that compared with HFNC, CPAP was associated with lower costs and higher quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). The expected annual cost per patient with CPAP was US$17,574 and with HFNC was US$29,421. The QALYs per person estimated with CPAP were 0.92 and with HFNC was 0.91. This position of absolute dominance of CPAP (CPAP has lower costs and higher QALYs than HFNI) makes it unnecessary to estimate the incremental cost-utility ratio.

CONCLUSIONS

CPAP is cost-effective, over the HFNC, in infants with severe-moderate bronchiolitis in Colombia. Our study provides evidence that should be used by decision-makers to improve clinical practice guidelines and should be replicated to validate their results in other countries.

Effect of High-Flow Nasal Cannula Therapy vs Continuous Positive Airway Pressure Therapy on Liberation From Respiratory Support in Acutely Ill Children Admitted to Pediatric Critical Care Units: A Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

The optimal first-line mode of noninvasive respiratory support for acutely ill children is not known.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the noninferiority of high-flow nasal cannula therapy (HFNC) as the first-line mode of noninvasive respiratory support for acute illness, compared with continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP), for time to liberation from all forms of respiratory support.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Pragmatic, multicenter, randomized noninferiority clinical trial conducted in 24 pediatric critical care units in the United Kingdom among 600 acutely ill children aged 0 to 15 years who were clinically assessed to require noninvasive respiratory support, recruited between August 2019 and November 2021, with last follow-up completed in March 2022.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were randomized 1:1 to commence either HFNC at a flow rate based on patient weight (n = 301) or CPAP of 7 to 8 cm H2O (n = 299).

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was time from randomization to liberation from respiratory support, defined as the start of a 48-hour period during which a participant was free from all forms of respiratory support (invasive or noninvasive), assessed against a noninferiority margin of an adjusted hazard ratio of 0.75. Seven secondary outcomes were assessed, including mortality at critical care unit discharge, intubation within 48 hours, and use of sedation.

RESULTS

Of the 600 randomized children, consent was not obtained for 5 (HFNC: 1; CPAP: 4) and respiratory support was not started in 22 (HFNC: 5; CPAP: 17); 573 children (HFNC: 295; CPAP: 278) were included in the primary analysis (median age, 9 months; 226 girls [39%]). The median time to liberation in the HFNC group was 52.9 hours (95% CI, 46.0-60.9 hours) vs 47.9 hours (95% CI, 40.5-55.7 hours) in the CPAP group (absolute difference, 5.0 hours [95% CI -10.1 to 17.4 hours]; adjusted hazard ratio 1.03 [1-sided 97.5% CI, 0.86-∞]). This met the criterion for noninferiority. Of the 7 prespecified secondary outcomes, 3 were significantly lower in the HFNC group: use of sedation (27.7% vs 37%; adjusted odds ratio, 0.59 [95% CI, 0.39-0.88]); mean duration of critical care stay (5 days vs 7.4 days; adjusted mean difference, -3 days [95% CI, -5.1 to -1 days]); and mean duration of acute hospital stay (13.8 days vs 19.5 days; adjusted mean difference, -7.6 days [95% CI, -13.2 to -1.9 days]). The most common adverse event was nasal trauma (HFNC: 6/295 [2.0%]; CPAP: 18/278 [6.5%]).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Among acutely ill children clinically assessed to require noninvasive respiratory support in a pediatric critical care unit, HFNC compared with CPAP met the criterion for noninferiority for time to liberation from respiratory support.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN.org Identifier: ISRCTN60048867.

Mechanical Ventilation and Respiratory Support in the Pediatric Intensive Care Unit

Children admitted to the pediatric intensive care unit often require respiratory support for the treatment of respiratory distress and failure. Respiratory support comprises both noninvasive modalities (ie, heated humidified high-flow nasal cannula, continuous positive airway pressure, bilevel positive airway pressure, negative pressure ventilation) and invasive mechanical ventilation. In this article, we review the various essential elements and considerations involved in the planning and application of respiratory support in the treatment of the critically ill children.

High Flow Nasal Cannula in the Pediatric Intensive Care Unit

INTRODUCTION

The use of high flow nasal cannula (HFNC) has become widely used in pediatric intensive care units (PICUs) throughout the world. The rapid adoption has outpaced the number of studies evaluating the safety and efficacy in a variety of pediatric diseases/conditions.

AREAS COVERED

This scoping review begins with the definition and mechanisms of action of HFNC and then follows with a review of the literature focused on studies performed on critically ill children cared for in the PICU. The Pubmed database was searched with a pediatric filter from the time period 2000 to 2021.

EXPERT OPINION

The rapid adoption of HFNC in PICUs has largely been driven by changes in institutional practices and small observational studies. There is a lack of adequately powered studies evaluating patient-centered outcomes, such as intubation rates, mortality, PICU and hospital length of stay. Given the wide variability in flow rates and clinical indications, more research is needed to better define effective flow rates for different disease states as well as markers of treatment success and failure. One particular entity that is poorly studied is the use of HFNC in those at risk for developing pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome (PARDS).

Safety and effectiveness of bubble continuous positive airway pressure as respiratory support for bronchiolitis in a pediatric ward

The results of several clinical trials suggest that continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) for acute bronchiolitis can be more effective than high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC). The use of HFNC involved a minimum reduction (5%) in admissions to the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) in our hospital. Our main aim was to evaluate its safety and effectiveness as respiratory support for patients with bronchiolitis in a pediatric general ward. A secondary goal was to compare the admissions to PICU and the invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) rate of patients treated with HFNC and those treated with HFNC/b-CPAP during the 2018-2019 and 2019-2020 epidemic seasons, respectively. Two prospective single-centre observational studies were performed. For the main aim, a cohort study (CS1) was carried out from 1st of November 2019 to 15th of January 2020. Inclusion criteria were children aged up to 3 months with bronchiolitis treated with b-CPAP support when HFNC failed. Epidemiological and clinical parameters were collected before and 60 min after the onset of CPAP and compared between the responder (R) and non-responders (NR) groups. NR was the group that required PICU admission. One hundred fifty-eight patients were admitted to the ward with bronchiolitis and HFNC. Fifty-seven out of one hundred fifty-eight required b-CPAP. No adverse events were observed. Thirty-two out of fifty-seven remained in the general ward (R-group), and 25/57 were admitted to PICU (NR-group). There were statistically significant differences in respiratory rate (RR) and heart rate (HR) between both groups before and after the initiation of b-CPAP, but the multivariable models showed that the main differences were observed after 60 min of therapy (lower HR, RR, BROSJOD score and FiO2 in the R-group). For the secondary aim, another cohort study (CS2) was performed comparing data from a pre-b-CPAP bronchiolitis season (1st of November 2018 to 15th January 2019) and the b-CPAP season (2019-2020). Inclusion criteria in pre-b-CPAP season were children aged up to 3 months admitted to the same general ward with moderate-severe bronchiolitis and with HFNC support. Admissions to PICU during the CPAP season were significantly reduced, without entailing an increase in the rate of IMV.

CONCLUSION

The implementation of b-CPAP for patients with bronchiolitis in a pediatric ward, in whom HFNC fails, is safe and effective and results in a reduction in PICU admissions.

WHAT IS KNOWN

• Bronchiolitis is one of the most frequent respiratory infections in children and one of the leading causes of hospitalization in infants. • Several studies suggest that the use of continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) for acute bronchiolitis can be more effective than the high flow nasal cannula (HFNC). CPAP is a non-invasive ventilation (NIV) therapy used in patients admitted to pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) with progressive moderate-severe bronchiolitis. There is little experience in the literature on the use of continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) for acute bronchiolitis in a general ward.

WHAT IS NEW

• CPAP could be safely and effectively used as respiratory support in young infants with moderate-severe bronchiolitis in a general ward and it reduced the rate of patients who required PICU admission. • Patients' heart and respiratory rate and their FiO2 needs in the first 60 minutes may help to decide whether or not to continue the CPAP therapy in a general ward.

Comparison of high flow nasal cannula and non-invasive positive pressure ventilation in children with bronchiolitis: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

The effects of high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) compared to non-invasive positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) on children with bronchiolitis remain unclear.

METHODS

This meta-analysis was performed following the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis (PRISMA) statement. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were identified from a comprehensive search in PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science without time and language limitations. Primary endpoints include the rate of treatment failure, the rate of need for intubation, and the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) length of stay.

RESULTS

Five RCTs including 541 children of less than 24 months were enrolled in the meta-analysis. Compared to the NIPPV group, the rate of treatment failure was significantly higher in the HFNC treatment group (I ² = 0.0%, P = 0.574; RR 1.523, 95% CI 1.205 to 1.924, P < 0.001). No significant difference was noted in the need for intubation (I ² = 0.0%, P = 0.431; RR 0.874, 95% CI 0.598 to 1.276, P = 0.485) and the PICU length of stay (I ² = 0.0%, P = 0.568; WMD = -0.097, 95% CI = -0.480 to 0.285, P = 0.618) between the HFNC group and the NIPPV treatment.

CONCLUSION

Compared to the NIPPV group, HFNC therapy was associated with a significantly higher treatment failure rate in children suffering from bronchiolitis. The intubation rate and the PICU length of stay were comparable between the two approaches.

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.

Efficacy and safety of high flow nasal oxygen for children with bronchiolitis: systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

To assess the published evidence to establish the efficacy and safety of high flow oxygen cannula (HFNC) as respiratory support for children up to 24 months of age with bronchiolitis within acute hospital settings.

METHODS

We searched eight databases up to March 2021. Studies including children up to 24 months of age with a diagnosis of bronchiolitis recruited to an randomised controlled trial were considered in the full meta-analysis. At least one arm of the study must include HFNC as respiratory support and report at least one of the outcomes of interest. Studies were identified and extracted by two reviewers. Data were analysed using Review Manager V.5.4.

RESULTS

From 2943 article titles, 308 full articles were screened for inclusion. 23 studies met the inclusion criteria, 15 were included in the metanalyses. Four studies reported on treatment failure rates when comparing HFNC to standard oxygen therapy (SOT). Data suggests HFNC is superior to SOT (OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.57). Four studies reported on treatment failure rates when comparing HFNC to continuous positive airways pressure (CPAP). No significant difference was found between CPAP and HFNC (OR 1.64, 95% CI 0.96 to 2.79; p=0.07). Four studies report on adverse outcomes when comparing HFNC to SOT. No significant difference was found between HFNC & SOT (OR 1.47, 95% CI 0.54 to 3.99).

CONCLUSION

HFNC is superior to SOT in terms of treatment failure and there is no significant difference between HFNC and CPAP in terms of treatment failure. The results suggest HFNC is safe to use in acute hospital settings.

Outcomes of High-Flow Nasal Cannula Vs. Nasal Continuous Positive Airway Pressure in Young Children With Respiratory Distress: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) has been associated with a lower risk of treatment failure than high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) in pediatric patients with respiratory distress and severe hypoxemia. However, the publication of new trials on children younger than 2 years warrants a review and updated meta-analysis of the evidence. Methods: We conducted a systematic search in the PubMed, Scopus, and Google scholar databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in pediatric patients with acute respiratory distress that examined outcomes of interest by the two usual management modalities (CPAP and HFNC). We used pooled adjusted relative risks (RRs) to present the strength of association for categorical outcomes and weighted mean differences (WMDs) for continuous outcomes. Results: We included data from six articles in the meta-analysis. The quality of the studies was deemed good. Included studies had infants with either acute viral bronchiolitis or pneumonia. Compared to CPAP, HFNC treatment carried a significantly higher risk of treatment failure [RR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.06 to 1.99; I ² = 0.0%, n = 6]. Patients receiving HFNC had a lower risk of adverse events, mainly nasal trauma [RR, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.14 to 0.62; I ² = 0.0%, n = 2] than the others. The risk of mortality [RR, 3.33; 95% CI, 0.95, 11.67; n = 1] and need for intubation [RR, 1.69; 95% CI, 0.97, 2.94; I ² = 0.0%, n = 5] were statistically similar between the two management strategies; however, the direction of the pooled effect sizes is indicative of a nearly three times higher mortality and two times higher risk of intubation in those receiving HFNC. We found no statistically significant differences between the two management modalities in terms of modified woods clinical asthma score (M-WCAS; denoting severity of respiratory distress) and hospitalization length (days). Patients receiving HFNC had the time to treatment failure reduced by approximately 3 h [WMD, -3.35; 95% CI, -4.93 to -1.76; I ² = 0.0%, n = 2] compared to those on CPAP. Conclusions: Among children with respiratory distress younger than 2 years, HFNC appears to be associated with higher risk of treatment failure and possibly, an increased risk of need for intubation and mortality. Adequately powered trials are needed to confirm which management strategy is better.