首页> 外文期刊>European journal of pediatrics >Comparison of a high-flow humidified nasal cannula to nasal continuous positive airway pressure in children with acute bronchiolitis: Experience in a pediatric intensive care unit
【24h】

Comparison of a high-flow humidified nasal cannula to nasal continuous positive airway pressure in children with acute bronchiolitis: Experience in a pediatric intensive care unit

机译:急性细支气管炎患儿高流量加湿鼻导管与鼻腔持续气道正压的比较:在儿科重症监护室的经验

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

The objective of the current study is to compare the use of a nasal continuous positive airway pressure (nCPAP) to a high-flow humidified nasal cannula (HFNC) in infants with acute bronchiolitis, who were admitted to a pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) during two consecutive seasons. We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of all infants admitted to a PICU at a tertiary care French hospital during the bronchiolitis seasons of 2010/11 and 2011/12. Infants admitted to the PICU, who required noninvasive respiratory support, were included. The first noninvasive respiratory support modality was nCPAP during the 2010/11 season, while HFNC was used during the 2011/2012 season. We compared the length of stay (LOS) in the PICU; the daily measure of PCO2 and pH; and the mean of the five higher values of heart rate (HR), respiratory rate (RR), FiO2, and SpO2 each day, during the first 5 days. Thirty-four children met the inclusion criteria: 19 during the first period (nCPAP group) and 15 during the second period (HFNC group). Parameters such as LOS in PICU and oxygenation were similar in the two groups. Oxygen weaning occurred during the same time for the two groups. There were no differences between the two groups for RR, HR, FiO2, and CO2 evolution. HFNC therapy failed in three patients, two of whom required invasive mechanical ventilation, versus one in the nCPAP group. Conclusion: We did not find a difference between HFNC and nCPAP in the management of severe bronchiolitis in our PICU. Larger prospective studies are required to confirm these findings.
机译:本研究的目的是比较急性小支气管炎婴儿入院小儿重症监护病房(PICU)的鼻持续气道正压通气(nCPAP)与高流量加湿鼻导管(HFNC)的使用情况在两个连续的季节。我们回顾性回顾了2010/11年和2011/12年毛细支气管炎季节法国一家三级医院收治PICU的所有婴儿的病历。纳入需要非侵入性呼吸支持的PICU入院婴儿。第一个非侵入性呼吸支持方式是在2010/11赛季使用nCPAP,而在2011/2012赛季使用HFNC。我们比较了PICU的住院时间(LOS);每天测量的PCO2和pH值;以及前5天内每天心率(HR),呼吸频率(RR),FiO2和SpO2五个较高值的平均值。三十四名儿童符合入选标准:第一期为19(nCPAP组),第二期为15(HFNC组)。两组的PICU中的LOS和氧合等参数相似。两组在同一时间断奶。两组之间的RR,HR,FiO2和CO2释放无差异。 HFNC治疗失败的3例患者,其中2例需要有创机械通气,而nCPAP组则为1例。结论:在重症细支气管炎的治疗中,HFNC和nCPAP之间没有差异。需要更大的前瞻性研究来证实这些发现。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号