A comparison of clinical efficacy between high frequency oscillatory ventilation and conventional ventilation with lung volume recruitment in pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome: A randomized controlled trial

Understanding clinical and biological heterogeneity to advance precision medicine in paediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome

Paediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome (PARDS) is a heterogeneous clinical syndrome that is associated with high rates of mortality and long-term morbidity. Factors that distinguish PARDS from adult acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) include changes in developmental stage and lung maturation with age, precipitating factors, and comorbidities. No specific treatment is available for PARDS and management is largely supportive, but methods to identify patients who would benefit from specific ventilation strategies or ancillary treatments, such as prone positioning, are needed. Understanding of the clinical and biological heterogeneity of PARDS, and of differences in clinical features and clinical course, pathobiology, response to treatment, and outcomes between PARDS and adult ARDS, will be key to the development of novel preventive and therapeutic strategies and a precision medicine approach to care. Studies in which clinical, biomarker, and transcriptomic data, as well as informatics, are used to unpack the biological and phenotypic heterogeneity of PARDS, and implementation of methods to better identify patients with PARDS, including methods to rapidly identify subphenotypes and endotypes at the point of care, will drive progress on the path to precision medicine.

ARDS Clinical Practice Guideline 2021

BACKGROUND

The joint committee of the Japanese Society of Intensive Care Medicine/Japanese Respiratory Society/Japanese Society of Respiratory Care Medicine on ARDS Clinical Practice Guideline has created and released the ARDS Clinical Practice Guideline 2021.

METHODS

The 2016 edition of the Clinical Practice Guideline covered clinical questions (CQs) that targeted only adults, but the present guideline includes 15 CQs for children in addition to 46 CQs for adults. As with the previous edition, we used a systematic review method with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system as well as a degree of recommendation determination method. We also conducted systematic reviews that used meta-analyses of diagnostic accuracy and network meta-analyses as a new method.

RESULTS

Recommendations for adult patients with ARDS are described: we suggest against using serum C-reactive protein and procalcitonin levels to identify bacterial pneumonia as the underlying disease (GRADE 2D); we recommend limiting tidal volume to 4-8 mL/kg for mechanical ventilation (GRADE 1D); we recommend against managements targeting an excessively low SpO2 (PaO2) (GRADE 2D); we suggest against using transpulmonary pressure as a routine basis in positive end-expiratory pressure settings (GRADE 2B); we suggest implementing extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for those with severe ARDS (GRADE 2B); we suggest against using high-dose steroids (GRADE 2C); and we recommend using low-dose steroids (GRADE 1B). The recommendations for pediatric patients with ARDS are as follows: we suggest against using non-invasive respiratory support (non-invasive positive pressure ventilation/high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy) (GRADE 2D), we suggest placing pediatric patients with moderate ARDS in the prone position (GRADE 2D), we suggest against routinely implementing NO inhalation therapy (GRADE 2C), and we suggest against implementing daily sedation interruption for pediatric patients with respiratory failure (GRADE 2D).

CONCLUSIONS

This article is a translated summary of the full version of the ARDS Clinical Practice Guideline 2021 published in Japanese (URL: https://www.jsicm.org/publication/guideline.html ). The original text, which was written for Japanese healthcare professionals, may include different perspectives from healthcare professionals of other countries.

ARDS clinical practice guideline 2021

BACKGROUND

The joint committee of the Japanese Society of Intensive Care Medicine/Japanese Respiratory Society/Japanese Society of Respiratory Care Medicine on ARDS Clinical Practice Guideline has created and released the ARDS Clinical Practice Guideline 2021.

METHODS

The 2016 edition of the Clinical Practice Guideline covered clinical questions (CQs) that targeted only adults, but the present guideline includes 15 CQs for children in addition to 46 CQs for adults. As with the previous edition, we used a systematic review method with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system as well as a degree of recommendation determination method. We also conducted systematic reviews that used meta-analyses of diagnostic accuracy and network meta-analyses as a new method.

RESULTS

Recommendations for adult patients with ARDS are described: we suggest against using serum C-reactive protein and procalcitonin levels to identify bacterial pneumonia as the underlying disease (GRADE 2D); we recommend limiting tidal volume to 4-8 mL/kg for mechanical ventilation (GRADE 1D); we recommend against managements targeting an excessively low SpO₂ (PaO₂) (GRADE 2D); we suggest against using transpulmonary pressure as a routine basis in positive end-expiratory pressure settings (GRADE 2B); we suggest implementing extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for those with severe ARDS (GRADE 2B); we suggest against using high-dose steroids (GRADE 2C); and we recommend using low-dose steroids (GRADE 1B). The recommendations for pediatric patients with ARDS are as follows: we suggest against using non-invasive respiratory support (non-invasive positive pressure ventilation/high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy) (GRADE 2D); we suggest placing pediatric patients with moderate ARDS in the prone position (GRADE 2D); we suggest against routinely implementing NO inhalation therapy (GRADE 2C); and we suggest against implementing daily sedation interruption for pediatric patients with respiratory failure (GRADE 2D).

CONCLUSIONS

This article is a translated summary of the full version of the ARDS Clinical Practice Guideline 2021 published in Japanese (URL: https://www.jrs.or.jp/publication/jrs_guidelines/). The original text, which was written for Japanese healthcare professionals, may include different perspectives from healthcare professionals of other countries.

The Physiological Basis of High-Frequency Oscillatory Ventilation and Current Evidence in Adults and Children: A Narrative Review

High-frequency oscillatory ventilation (HFOV) is a type of invasive mechanical ventilation that employs supra-physiologic respiratory rates and low tidal volumes (V_T) that approximate the anatomic deadspace. During HFOV, mean airway pressure is set and gas is then displaced towards and away from the patient through a piston. Carbon dioxide (CO₂) is cleared based on the power (amplitude) setting and frequency, with lower frequencies resulting in higher V_T and CO₂ clearance. Airway pressure amplitude is significantly attenuated throughout the respiratory system and mechanical strain and stress on the alveoli are theoretically minimized. HFOV has been purported as a form of lung protective ventilation that minimizes volutrauma, atelectrauma, and biotrauma. Following two large randomized controlled trials showing no benefit and harm, respectively, HFOV has largely been abandoned in adults with ARDS. A multi-center clinical trial in children is ongoing. This article aims to review the physiologic rationale for the use of HFOV in patients with acute respiratory failure, summarize relevant bench and animal models, and discuss the potential use of HFOV as a primary and rescue mode in adults and children with severe respiratory failure.

Mechanical Ventilation in Pediatric and Neonatal Patients

Pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome (PARDS) remains a significant cause of morbidity and mortality, with mortality rates as high as 50% in children with severe PARDS. Despite this, pediatric lung injury and mechanical ventilation has been poorly studied, with the majority of investigations being observational or retrospective and with only a few randomized controlled trials to guide intensivists. The most recent and universally accepted guidelines for pediatric lung injury are based on consensus opinion rather than objective data. Therefore, most neonatal and pediatric mechanical ventilation practices have been arbitrarily adapted from adult protocols, neglecting the differences in lung pathophysiology, response to injury, and co-morbidities among the three groups. Low tidal volume ventilation has been generally accepted for pediatric patients, even in the absence of supporting evidence. No target tidal volume range has consistently been associated with outcomes, and compliance with delivering specific tidal volume ranges has been poor. Similarly, optimal PEEP has not been well-studied, with a general acceptance of higher levels of F_iO₂ and less aggressive PEEP titration as compared with adults. Other modes of ventilation including airway pressure release ventilation and high frequency ventilation have not been studied in a systematic fashion and there is too little evidence to recommend supporting or refraining from their use. There have been no consistent outcomes among studies in determining optimal modes or methods of setting them. In this review, the studies performed to date on mechanical ventilation strategies in neonatal and pediatric populations will be analyzed. There may not be a single optimal mechanical ventilation approach, where the best method may simply be one that allows for a personalized approach with settings adapted to the individual patient and disease pathophysiology. The challenges and barriers to conducting well-powered and robust multi-institutional studies will also be addressed, as well as reconsidering outcome measures and study design.

The Paediatric AirWay Suction (PAWS) appropriateness guide for endotracheal suction interventions

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE

Endotracheal suction is an invasive and potentially harmful technique used for airway clearance in mechanically ventilated children. Choice of suction intervention remains a complex and variable process. We sought to develop appropriate use criteria for endotracheal suction interventions used in paediatric populations.

METHODS

The RAND Corporation and University of California, Los Angeles Appropriateness Method was used to develop the Paediatric AirWay Suction appropriateness guide. This included defining key terms, synthesising current evidence, engaging an expert multidisciplinary panel, case scenario development, and two rounds of appropriateness ratings (weighing harm with benefit). Indications (clinical scenarios) were developed from common applications or anticipated use, current practice guidelines, clinical trial results, and expert consultation.

RESULTS

Overall, 148 (19%) scenarios were rated as appropriate (benefit outweighs harm), 542 (67%) as uncertain, and 94 (11%) as inappropriate (harm outweighs benefit). Disagreement occurred in 24 (3%) clinical scenarios, namely presuction and postsuction bagging across populations and age groups. In general, the use of closed suction was rated as appropriate, particularly in the subspecialty population 'patients with highly infectious respiratory disease'. Routine application of 0.9% saline for nonrespiratory indications was more likely to be inappropriate/uncertain than appropriate. Panellists preferred clinically indicated suction versus routine suction in most circumstances.

CONCLUSION

Appropriate use criteria for endotracheal suction in the paediatric intensive care have the potential to impact clinical decision-making, reduce practice variability, and improve patient outcomes. Furthermore, recognition of uncertain clinical scenarios facilitates identification of areas that would benefit from future research.

The clinical effects of high-frequency oscillatory ventilation in the treatment of neonatal severe meconium aspiration syndrome complicated with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome

OBJECTIVE

To explore the efficacy and safety of high-frequency oscillatory ventilation (HFOV) in the treatment of severe meconium aspiration syndrome (MAS) complicated with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS).

METHODS

A total of 65 infants with severe MAS complicated with severe ARDS were included in the study. The clinical efficacy of treatment for the HFOV group (n = 31) and the conventional mechanical ventilation (CMV) group (n = 34) was retrospectively analysed. The partial pressure of oxygen (PaO₂), partial pressure of carbon dioxide (PaCO₂), PaO₂/fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO₂), and oxygen index values before and at 6, 12, 24, 48, and 72 h after mechanical ventilation, the mechanical ventilation time, oxygen inhalation time, incidence of complications, and outcomes of the two groups were compared.

RESULTS

At 6, 12, 24, and 48 h after mechanical ventilation, the PaO₂ in the HFOV group was significantly higher than in the CMV group, while the PaCO₂ in the HFOV group was significantly lower than in the CMV group (P < 0.05). At 6, 12, 24, 48, and 72 h after mechanical ventilation, PaO₂/FiO2 in the HFOV group was significantly higher than in the CMV group, and the OI in the HFOV group was significantly lower than in the CMV group (P < 0.05). Mechanical ventilation time, oxygen inhalation time, and the incidence of air leakage were significantly lower in the HFOV than in the CMV group (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, HFOV can effectively improve lung ventilation and oxygenation function, shorten ventilator treatment time, and reduce the incidence rate of air leakage for neonatal MAS, making it a safe and effective treatment option.

High-frequency oscillatory ventilation in children: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

High-frequency oscillatory ventilation (HFOV) is an alternative mechanical ventilation mode proposed to reduce ventilator-induced lung injuries and improve clinical outcomes. The aim of this study was to determine the effects of HFOV compared to conventional mechanical ventilation (CMV) when used in children with hypoxemic respiratory failure.

METHODS

The literature search was conducted to identify all studies published before December 2020. Eligible studies included a population aged between 28 days and 18 years old, presented original data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or observational studies, compared the use of HFOV with CMV. Meta-analyses of the pooled data were performed by using random-effects models with inverse-variance weighting.

RESULTS

A total of 11 studies (2605 cases) were included, most of them evaluating patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome. The mean age of participants was 8.2 months and the mean oxygenation index of those included in the RCTs was 24.4. The effect of HFOV on mortality was not significant, and clinically significant harm or benefit could not be excluded (risk ratio [RR], 0.93; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.72 to 1.20). No significant difference between groups was found in duration of mechanical ventilation (-2.23; 95% CI, -5.07 to 0.61), treatment failure (RR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.08 to 1.02), and occurrence of barotrauma (RR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.39 to 1.99).

CONCLUSION

The scarce evidence currently available does not allow us to conclude that HFOV has advantages over CMV and further studies are needed to clarify its role in the treatment of acute hypoxemic respiratory failure in children.

Surviving sepsis campaign international guidelines for the management of septic shock and sepsis-associated organ dysfunction in children

OBJECTIVES

To develop evidence-based recommendations for clinicians caring for children (including infants, school-aged children, and adolescents) with septic shock and other sepsis-associated organ dysfunction.

DESIGN

A panel of 49 international experts, representing 12 international organizations, as well as three methodologists and three public members was convened. Panel members assembled at key international meetings (for those panel members attending the conference), and a stand-alone meeting was held for all panel members in November 2018. A formal conflict-of-interest policy was developed at the onset of the process and enforced throughout. Teleconferences and electronic-based discussion among the chairs, co-chairs, methodologists, and group heads, as well as within subgroups, served as an integral part of the guideline development process.

METHODS

The panel consisted of six subgroups: recognition and management of infection, hemodynamics and resuscitation, ventilation, endocrine and metabolic therapies, adjunctive therapies, and research priorities. We conducted a systematic review for each Population, Intervention, Control, and Outcomes question to identify the best available evidence, statistically summarized the evidence, and then assessed the quality of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. We used the evidence-to-decision framework to formulate recommendations as strong or weak, or as a best practice statement. In addition, "in our practice" statements were included when evidence was inconclusive to issue a recommendation, but the panel felt that some guidance based on practice patterns may be appropriate.

RESULTS

The panel provided 77 statements on the management and resuscitation of children with septic shock and other sepsis-associated organ dysfunction. Overall, six were strong recommendations, 49 were weak recommendations, and nine were best-practice statements. For 13 questions, no recommendations could be made; but, for 10 of these, "in our practice" statements were provided. In addition, 52 research priorities were identified.

CONCLUSIONS

A large cohort of international experts was able to achieve consensus regarding many recommendations for the best care of children with sepsis, acknowledging that most aspects of care had relatively low quality of evidence resulting in the frequent issuance of weak recommendations. Despite this challenge, these recommendations regarding the management of children with septic shock and other sepsis-associated organ dysfunction provide a foundation for consistent care to improve outcomes and inform future research.

Surviving Sepsis Campaign International Guidelines for the Management of Septic Shock and Sepsis-Associated Organ Dysfunction in Children

OBJECTIVES

To develop evidence-based recommendations for clinicians caring for children (including infants, school-aged children, and adolescents) with septic shock and other sepsis-associated organ dysfunction.

DESIGN

A panel of 49 international experts, representing 12 international organizations, as well as three methodologists and three public members was convened. Panel members assembled at key international meetings (for those panel members attending the conference), and a stand-alone meeting was held for all panel members in November 2018. A formal conflict-of-interest policy was developed at the onset of the process and enforced throughout. Teleconferences and electronic-based discussion among the chairs, co-chairs, methodologists, and group heads, as well as within subgroups, served as an integral part of the guideline development process.

METHODS

The panel consisted of six subgroups: recognition and management of infection, hemodynamics and resuscitation, ventilation, endocrine and metabolic therapies, adjunctive therapies, and research priorities. We conducted a systematic review for each Population, Intervention, Control, and Outcomes question to identify the best available evidence, statistically summarized the evidence, and then assessed the quality of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. We used the evidence-to-decision framework to formulate recommendations as strong or weak, or as a best practice statement. In addition, "in our practice" statements were included when evidence was inconclusive to issue a recommendation, but the panel felt that some guidance based on practice patterns may be appropriate.

RESULTS

The panel provided 77 statements on the management and resuscitation of children with septic shock and other sepsis-associated organ dysfunction. Overall, six were strong recommendations, 52 were weak recommendations, and nine were best-practice statements. For 13 questions, no recommendations could be made; but, for 10 of these, "in our practice" statements were provided. In addition, 49 research priorities were identified.

CONCLUSIONS

A large cohort of international experts was able to achieve consensus regarding many recommendations for the best care of children with sepsis, acknowledging that most aspects of care had relatively low quality of evidence resulting in the frequent issuance of weak recommendations. Despite this challenge, these recommendations regarding the management of children with septic shock and other sepsis-associated organ dysfunction provide a foundation for consistent care to improve outcomes and inform future research.

The impact of high frequency oscillatory ventilation on mortality in paediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome

BACKGROUND

High-frequency oscillatory ventilation (HFOV) use was associated with greater mortality in adult acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Nevertheless, HFOV is still frequently used as rescue therapy in paediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome (PARDS). In view of the limited evidence for HFOV in PARDS and evidence demonstrating harm in adult patients with ARDS, we hypothesized that HFOV use compared to other modes of mechanical ventilation is associated with increased mortality in PARDS.

METHODS

Patients with PARDS from 10 paediatric intensive care units across Asia from 2009 to 2015 were identified. Data on epidemiology and clinical outcomes were collected. Patients on HFOV were compared to patients on other modes of ventilation. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality and secondary outcomes were 28-day ventilator- (VFD) and intensive care unit- (IFD) free days. Genetic matching (GM) method was used to analyse the association between HFOV treatment with the primary outcome. Additionally, we performed a sensitivity analysis, including propensity score (PS) matching, inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) and marginal structural modelling (MSM) to estimate the treatment effect.

RESULTS

A total of 328 patients were included. In the first 7 days of PARDS, 122/328 (37.2%) patients were supported with HFOV. There were significant differences in baseline oxygenation index (OI) between the HFOV and non-HFOV groups (18.8 [12.0, 30.2] vs. 7.7 [5.1, 13.1] respectively; p < 0.001). A total of 118 pairs were matched in the GM method which found a significant association between HFOV with 28-day mortality in PARDS [odds ratio 2.3, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.3, 4.4, p value 0.01]. VFD was indifferent between the HFOV and non-HFOV group [mean difference - 1.3 (95%CI - 3.4, 0.9); p = 0.29] but IFD was significantly lower in the HFOV group [- 2.5 (95%CI - 4.9, - 0.5); p = 0.03]. From the sensitivity analysis, PS matching, IPTW and MSM all showed consistent direction of HFOV treatment effect in PARDS.

CONCLUSION

The use of HFOV was associated with increased 28-day mortality in PARDS. This study suggests caution but does not eliminate equivocality and a randomized controlled trial is justified to examine the true association.

High-frequency oscillatory ventilation: A narrative review

High-frequency oscillatory ventilation (HFOV) is a lung-protective strategy that can be utilized in the full spectrum of patient populations ranging from neonatal to adults with acute lung injury. HFOV is often utilized as a rescue strategy when conventional mechanical ventilation (CV) has failed. HFOV uses low tidal volumes and constant mean airway pressures in conjunction with high respiratory rates to provide beneficial effects on oxygenation and ventilation, while eliminating the traumatic “inflate–deflate” cycle imposed by CV. Although statistical evidence supporting HFOV is particularly low, potential benefits for its application in many clinical manifestations still remain. High-frequency oscillation is a safe and effective rescue mode of ventilation for the treatment of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). All patients who have ventilator-induced lung injury (VILI) or are at risk of developing VILI or ARDS would be suitable candidates for HFOV, especially those who have failed conventional mechanical ventilation. This narrative aims to provide a review of HFOV vis-à-vis its indications, contraindications, hazards, parameters to monitoring, patient selection, clinical goals, mechanisms of action, controls for optimizing ventilation and oxygenation, clinical application in ARDS, and a comparison with other modes of mechanical ventilation.

[A review on neonatal acute respiratory distress syndrome]

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a common clinical critical disease and is one of the main causes of death and disability in neonates. The etiology and pathogenesis of neonatal ARDS are complicated. It is an acute pulmonary inflammatory disease caused by the lack of pulmonary surfactant (PS) related to various pathological factors. It is difficult to distinguish neonatal ARDS from other diseases. At present, there is no specific treatment method for this disease. Respiratory support, PS replacement, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, nutrition support and liquid management are main treatment strategies. This paper reviews the research advance in etiology, clinical characteristics, diagnosis and treatment strategies of neonatal ARDS.

[A review on neonatal acute respiratory distress syndrome]

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a common clinical critical disease and is one of the main causes of death and disability in neonates. The etiology and pathogenesis of neonatal ARDS are complicated. It is an acute pulmonary inflammatory disease caused by the lack of pulmonary surfactant (PS) related to various pathological factors. It is difficult to distinguish neonatal ARDS from other diseases. At present, there is no specific treatment method for this disease. Respiratory support, PS replacement, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, nutrition support and liquid management are main treatment strategies. This paper reviews the research advance in etiology, clinical characteristics, diagnosis and treatment strategies of neonatal ARDS.

[A Meta analysis of the efficacy of high-frequency oscillatory ventilation versus conventional mechanical ventilation for treating pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome]

OBJECTIVE

To systematically assess the clinical efficacy of high-frequency oscillatory ventilation (HFOV) and conventional mechanical ventilation (CMV) for treating pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS).

METHODS

Data from randomized controlled trials comparing HFOV and CMV in the treatment of pediatric ARDS published before July 2016 were collected from the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Medline, CNKI, and Wanfang Data. Literature screening, data extraction, and quality assessment were performed by two independent reviewers according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The selected studies were then subjected to a Meta analysis using the RevMan 5.3 software.

RESULTS

A total of 6 studies involving 246 patients were included. The results of the Meta analysis showed that there were no significant differences between the HFOV and CMV groups in the in-hospital or 30-day mortality rate, incidence of barotrauma, mean ventilation time, and oxygenation index (P>0.05). However, compared with CMV, HFOV increased the PaO2/FiO2 ratio by 17%, 24%, and 31% at 24, 48, and 72 hours after treatment respectively, and improved oxygenation in patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the mortality rate is not reduced by HFOV in children with ARDS, this treatment can result in significant improvement in oxygenation compared with CMV. Further large-sample, multicenter, randomized clinical trials will be required to draw a definitive conclusion.

[A Meta analysis of the efficacy of high-frequency oscillatory ventilation versus conventional mechanical ventilation for treating pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome]

OBJECTIVE

To systematically assess the clinical efficacy of high-frequency oscillatory ventilation (HFOV) and conventional mechanical ventilation (CMV) for treating pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS).

METHODS

Data from randomized controlled trials comparing HFOV and CMV in the treatment of pediatric ARDS published before July 2016 were collected from the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Medline, CNKI, and Wanfang Data. Literature screening, data extraction, and quality assessment were performed by two independent reviewers according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The selected studies were then subjected to a Meta analysis using the RevMan 5.3 software.

RESULTS

A total of 6 studies involving 246 patients were included. The results of the Meta analysis showed that there were no significant differences between the HFOV and CMV groups in the in-hospital or 30-day mortality rate, incidence of barotrauma, mean ventilation time, and oxygenation index (P>0.05). However, compared with CMV, HFOV increased the PaO₂/FiO₂ ratio by 17%, 24%, and 31% at 24, 48, and 72 hours after treatment respectively, and improved oxygenation in patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the mortality rate is not reduced by HFOV in children with ARDS, this treatment can result in significant improvement in oxygenation compared with CMV. Further large-sample, multicenter, randomized clinical trials will be required to draw a definitive conclusion.

Special considerations for the management of pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome

INTRODUCTION

Pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) remains a diagnostic and therapeutic challenge with significant mortality and morbidity. There are limited data to guide identification and management.

AREAS COVERED

The Pediatric Acute Lung Injury Consensus Conference recently proposed pediatric-specific definitions for ARDS and management recommendations. In this review, we discuss aspects of pediatric ARDS that have received more attention over the past few years: high frequency oscillatory ventilation, administration of corticosteroids and functional outcomes. We conducted searches on PubMed, ClinicalKey and Google Scholar using medical subject heading terms and text words related to acute lung injury and ARDS. Expert commentary: The newly proposed definition for pediatric ARDS requires validation for efficacy in diagnosis and risk stratification. At present, there is insufficient evidence to support routine use of high frequency oscillatory ventilation or corticosteroids in pediatric ARDS. Further studies are required to determine the impact of pediatric ARDS on functional outcomes.