Noninvasive Ventilation After Pediatric Cardiac Surgery: To Flow or Not to Flow?

Use of high-flow nasal cannula versus other noninvasive ventilation techniques or conventional oxygen therapy for respiratory support following pediatric cardiac surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Noninvasive respiratory support may be provided to decrease the risk of postextubation failure following surgery. Despite these efforts, approximately 3%-27% of infants and children still experience respiratory failure after tracheal extubation following cardiac surgery. This systematic review evaluates studies comparing the efficacy of high-flow nasal cannula to conventional oxygen therapy such as nasal cannula and other noninvasive ventilation techniques in preventing postextubation failure in this patient population.

METHODS

A systematic and comprehensive search was conducted in major databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Central. The search encompassed articles focusing on the prophylactic use of high-flow nasal cannula following tracheal extubation in pediatric patients undergoing cardiac surgery for congenital heart disease. The inclusion criteria for this review consisted of randomized clinical trials as well as observational, cohort, and case-control studies.

RESULTS

A total of 1295 studies were screened and 12 studies met the inclusion criteria. These 12 studies included a total of 1565 children, classified into three groups: seven studies compared high-flow nasal cannula to noninvasive ventilation techniques, four studies compared high-flow nasal cannula to conventional oxygen therapy, and one observational single-arm study explored the use of high-flow nasal cannula with no control group. There was no significant difference in the incidence of tracheal reintubation between high-flow nasal cannula and conventional oxygen therapy (risk ratio [RR] = 0.67, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.24-1.90, p = .46). However, there was a lower incidence of tracheal reintubation in patients who were extubated to high-flow nasal cannula versus those extubated to noninvasive ventilation techniques (RR = 0.45, 95% CI: 0.32-0.63, p < .01). The high-flow nasal cannula group also demonstrated a lower mortality rate compared to the noninvasive ventilation techniques group (RR = 0.31, 95% CI: 0.16-0.61, p < .01) as well as a shorter postoperative length of stay (mean difference = -8.76 days, 95% CI: -13.08 to -4.45, p < .01) and shorter intensive care length of stay (mean difference = -4.63 days, 95% CI: -9.16 to -0.11, p = .04).

CONCLUSION

High-flow nasal cannula is more effective in reducing the rate of postextubation failure compared to other forms of noninvasive ventilation techniques following surgery for congenital heart disease in pediatric-aged patients. high-flow nasal cannula is also associated with lower mortality rates and shorter length of stay. However, when comparing high-flow nasal cannula to conventional oxygen therapy, the findings were inconclusive primarily due to a limited number of scientific studies available on this specific comparison. Future study is needed to further define the benefit of high-flow nasal cannula compared to conventional oxygen therapy and various types of noninvasive ventilation techniques.

Comparison of Two Noninvasive Ventilation Strategies (NHFOV Versus NIPPV) as Initial Postextubation Respiratory Support in High-Risk Infants After Congenital Heart Surgery

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to compare the effects of nasal high-frequency oscillatory ventilation (NHFOV) and noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation (NIPPV) as the initial postextubation therapies on preventing extubation failure (EF) in high-risk infants younger than three months after congenital heart surgery (CHS).

DESIGN

This was a single-center, randomized, unblinded clinical trial.

SETTING

The study was performed in a teaching hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

Between January 2020 and January 2021, a total of 150 infants underwent CHS in the authors' hospital.

INTERVENTIONS

Infants younger than three months with a high risk for extubation failure who were ready for extubation were randomized to either an NHFOV therapy group or an NIPPV therapy group, and received the corresponding noninvasive mechanical ventilation to prevent EF.

MEASUREMENTS

Primary outcomes were reintubation, long-term noninvasive ventilation (NIV) support (more than 72 hours), and the time in NIV therapy. The secondary outcomes were adverse events, including mild-moderate hypercapnia, severe hypercapnia, severe hypoxemia, treatment intolerance, signs of discomfort, unbearable dyspnea, inability to clear secretions, emesis, and aspiration.

MAIN RESULTS

Of 92 infants, 45 received NHFOV therapy, and 47 received NIPPV therapy after extubation. There were no significant differences between the NHFOV and the NIPPV therapy groups in the incidences of reintubation, long-term NIV support, and total time under NIV therapy. No significant difference was found of the severe hypercapnia between the two groups, but NHFOV treatment significantly decreased the rate of mild-moderate hypercapnia (p < 0.05). Other outcomes were similar in the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Among infants younger than three months after CHS who had undergone extubation, NIPPV therapy and NHFOV therapy were the equivalent NIV strategies for preventing extubation failure, and NHFOV therapy was more effective in avoiding mild-moderate hypercapnia.