Giovanna Chidini1, Edoardo Calderini, Paolo Pelosi. 1. Pediatric Intensive Care Unit, Department of Anesthesia and Critical Care, IRCCS Fondazione Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Mangiagalli e Regina Elena, Milan, Italy. giovannachid@libero.it
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of continuous positive airway pressure delivered by a new pediatric helmet in comparison with a standard facial mask in infants with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure. DESIGN: A single-center prospective case-control study. SETTING: Pediatric intensive care unit in a tertiary children hospital. PATIENTS AND INTERVENTIONS: Twenty consecutive infants treated with continuous positive airway pressure by a helmet matched with a control patient treated with continuous positive airway pressure by facial mask and selected by age, weight, PaO2:Fio2, and PaCO2 on pediatric intensive care unit admission. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Feasibility was defined as the incidence of continuous positive airway pressure protocol failure secondary to 1) failure to administer continuous positive airway pressure because of intolerance to the interface; 2) deterioration in gas exchange soon after continuous positive airway pressure institution; and 3) major clinical adverse events such as pneumothorax or any hemodynamic instability related to the continuous positive airway pressure safety system device's failure. Evaluation of feasibility included also the total application time of respiratory treatment, the number of continuous positive airway pressure discontinuations/first 24 hrs. Interface-related complications included air leaks, cutaneous pressure sores, eye irritation, inhalation, and gastric distension. The 20 patients and control subjects had similar matching characteristics. Continuous positive airway pressure delivered by a helmet compared with a facial mask reduced continuous positive airway pressure trial failure rate (p = .02), increased application time (p = .001) with less discontinuations (p = .001), and was not associated with an increased rate of major adverse events, resulting in decreased air leaks (p = .04) and pressure sores (p = .002). Both continuous positive airway pressure systems resulted in early and sustained improvement in oxygenation. CONCLUSIONS: The helmet might be considered a viable and safe alternative to a standard facial mask to deliver continuous positive airway pressure in hypoxemic infants in the pediatric intensive care unit setting. In our study, the helmet allowed more prolonged application of continuous positive airway pressure compared with a facial mask, ensuring similar improvement in oxygenation without any adverse events and clinical intolerance.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of continuous positive airway pressure delivered by a new pediatric helmet in comparison with a standard facial mask in infants with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure. DESIGN: A single-center prospective case-control study. SETTING: Pediatric intensive care unit in a tertiary children hospital. PATIENTS AND INTERVENTIONS: Twenty consecutive infants treated with continuous positive airway pressure by a helmet matched with a control patient treated with continuous positive airway pressure by facial mask and selected by age, weight, PaO2:Fio2, and PaCO2 on pediatric intensive care unit admission. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Feasibility was defined as the incidence of continuous positive airway pressure protocol failure secondary to 1) failure to administer continuous positive airway pressure because of intolerance to the interface; 2) deterioration in gas exchange soon after continuous positive airway pressure institution; and 3) major clinical adverse events such as pneumothorax or any hemodynamic instability related to the continuous positive airway pressure safety system device's failure. Evaluation of feasibility included also the total application time of respiratory treatment, the number of continuous positive airway pressure discontinuations/first 24 hrs. Interface-related complications included air leaks, cutaneous pressure sores, eye irritation, inhalation, and gastric distension. The 20 patients and control subjects had similar matching characteristics. Continuous positive airway pressure delivered by a helmet compared with a facial mask reduced continuous positive airway pressure trial failure rate (p = .02), increased application time (p = .001) with less discontinuations (p = .001), and was not associated with an increased rate of major adverse events, resulting in decreased air leaks (p = .04) and pressure sores (p = .002). Both continuous positive airway pressure systems resulted in early and sustained improvement in oxygenation. CONCLUSIONS: The helmet might be considered a viable and safe alternative to a standard facial mask to deliver continuous positive airway pressure in hypoxemic infants in the pediatric intensive care unit setting. In our study, the helmet allowed more prolonged application of continuous positive airway pressure compared with a facial mask, ensuring similar improvement in oxygenation without any adverse events and clinical intolerance.