M W Davies1, P H Sargent. 1. Grantley Stable Neonatal Unit, Royal Women's Hospital, Butterfield St, Herston, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia, 4029.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Acute lung injury, and acute respiratory distress syndrome, are syndromes of severe respiratory failure. Children with acute lung injury or acute respiratory syndrome have high mortality and significant morbidity. Partial liquid ventilation is proposed as a less injurious form of respiratory support for these children. Uncontrolled studies in adults have shown improvement in gas exchange and lung compliance with partial liquid ventilation A single uncontrolled study in six children with acute respiratory syndrome showed some improvement in gas exchange during three hours of partial liquid ventilation. OBJECTIVES: To assess whether partial liquid ventilation reduces either mortality or morbidity, or both, in children with acute lung injury or acute respiratory syndrome. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), The Cochrane Library issue 2, 2003; MEDLINE (1966 to April 2003); and CINAHL (1982 to April 2003); intensive care journals and conference proceedings; reference lists and 'grey literature'. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials which compared partial liquid ventilation with other forms of ventilation, in children (28 days - 18 years) with acute lung injury or acute respiratory syndrome, reporting one or more of the following: mortality; duration of mechanical ventilation, respiratory support, oxygen therapy, stay in the intensive care unit, or stay in hospital; infection; or long term cognitive impairment or neurodevelopmental progress or other long term morbidities. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently evaluated the quality of the relevant studies and extracted the data from the included studies. MAIN RESULTS: Only one study enrolling 182 patients (only reported as an abstract in conference proceedings) was identified and found eligible for inclusion: the authors report only limited results. The trial was stopped prematurely and therefore under-powered to detect any significant differences. The only outcome of clinical significance available was 28 day mortality: there was no statistically significant difference between groups with a relative risk for 28 day mortality in the partial liquid ventilation group of 1.54 (95% confidence intervals of 0.82 to 2.9). REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS: There is no evidence from randomized controlled trials to support or refute the use of partial liquid ventilation in children with acute lung injury or acute respiratory syndrome: adequately powered, high quality randomized controlled trials are still needed to assess its efficacy. Clinically relevant outcome measures should be assessed (mortality at discharge and later, duration of respiratory support and hospital stay, and long-term neurodevelopmental outcomes) and the studies should be published in full.
BACKGROUND:Acute lung injury, and acute respiratory distress syndrome, are syndromes of severe respiratory failure. Children with acute lung injury or acute respiratory syndrome have high mortality and significant morbidity. Partial liquid ventilation is proposed as a less injurious form of respiratory support for these children. Uncontrolled studies in adults have shown improvement in gas exchange and lung compliance with partial liquid ventilation A single uncontrolled study in six children with acute respiratory syndrome showed some improvement in gas exchange during three hours of partial liquid ventilation. OBJECTIVES: To assess whether partial liquid ventilation reduces either mortality or morbidity, or both, in children with acute lung injury or acute respiratory syndrome. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), The Cochrane Library issue 2, 2003; MEDLINE (1966 to April 2003); and CINAHL (1982 to April 2003); intensive care journals and conference proceedings; reference lists and 'grey literature'. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials which compared partial liquid ventilation with other forms of ventilation, in children (28 days - 18 years) with acute lung injury or acute respiratory syndrome, reporting one or more of the following: mortality; duration of mechanical ventilation, respiratory support, oxygen therapy, stay in the intensive care unit, or stay in hospital; infection; or long term cognitive impairment or neurodevelopmental progress or other long term morbidities. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently evaluated the quality of the relevant studies and extracted the data from the included studies. MAIN RESULTS: Only one study enrolling 182 patients (only reported as an abstract in conference proceedings) was identified and found eligible for inclusion: the authors report only limited results. The trial was stopped prematurely and therefore under-powered to detect any significant differences. The only outcome of clinical significance available was 28 day mortality: there was no statistically significant difference between groups with a relative risk for 28 day mortality in the partial liquid ventilation group of 1.54 (95% confidence intervals of 0.82 to 2.9). REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS: There is no evidence from randomized controlled trials to support or refute the use of partial liquid ventilation in children with acute lung injury or acute respiratory syndrome: adequately powered, high quality randomized controlled trials are still needed to assess its efficacy. Clinically relevant outcome measures should be assessed (mortality at discharge and later, duration of respiratory support and hospital stay, and long-term neurodevelopmental outcomes) and the studies should be published in full.