Asavari Kamerkar1, Justin Hotz1, Rica Morzov1, Christopher J L Newth2, Patrick A Ross2, Robinder G Khemani2. 1. Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, Children's Hospital Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA. 2. Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, Children's Hospital Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA; Department of Pediatrics, University of Southern California, Keck School of Medicine, Los Angeles, CA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To directly compare effort of breathing between high flow nasal cannula (HFNC), nasal intermittent mechanical ventilation (NIMV), and nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP). STUDY DESIGN: This was a single center prospective cross-over study for patients <6 months in the cardiothoracic or pediatric intensive care unit receiving nasal noninvasive respiratory support after extubation. We measured effort of breathing using esophageal manometry with pressure-rate product (PRP) on all 3 modes. NIMV synchrony was determined by comparing patient efforts (esophageal manometry) with mechanically delivered breaths (spirometry in ventilator circuit). On NIMV, PRP and synchrony was also measured after adding a nasal clip on 26 patients. RESULTS: Forty-two children were included. Median (IQR) age was 2 (0.5, 4) months. There was no difference in median PRP between HFNC 6 liters per minute, 355 (270,550), NIMV 12/5 cm H2O, 341 (235, 472), and NCPAP 5 cm H2O, 340 (245,506) (P?=?.33). Results were similar regardless of HFNC flow rate or NIMV inspiratory pressure. Median PRP on CPAP of 5 cm H2O prior to extubation 255 (176, 375) was significantly lower than all postextubation values (P?<?.002). On NIMV, less than 50% of patient efforts resulted in a ventilator breath, which was not improved with a nasal clip (P?>?.07)). However, as NIMV synchrony improved (>60%), PRP on NIMV was lower than on HFNC. CONCLUSIONS: For infants, effort of breathing is similar on HFNC, NIMV, and NCPAP after extubation, regardless of flow rate or inspiratory pressure. We speculate that bi-level NIMV may be superior if high levels of synchrony can be achieved.
OBJECTIVE: To directly compare effort of breathing between high flow nasal cannula (HFNC), nasal intermittent mechanical ventilation (NIMV), and nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP). STUDY DESIGN: This was a single center prospective cross-over study for patients <6 months in the cardiothoracic or pediatric intensive care unit receiving nasal noninvasive respiratory support after extubation. We measured effort of breathing using esophageal manometry with pressure-rate product (PRP) on all 3 modes. NIMV synchrony was determined by comparing patient efforts (esophageal manometry) with mechanically delivered breaths (spirometry in ventilator circuit). On NIMV, PRP and synchrony was also measured after adding a nasal clip on 26 patients. RESULTS: Forty-two children were included. Median (IQR) age was 2 (0.5, 4) months. There was no difference in median PRP between HFNC 6 liters per minute, 355 (270,550), NIMV 12/5 cm H2O, 341 (235, 472), and NCPAP 5 cm H2O, 340 (245,506) (P?=?.33). Results were similar regardless of HFNC flow rate or NIMV inspiratory pressure. Median PRP on CPAP of 5 cm H2O prior to extubation 255 (176, 375) was significantly lower than all postextubation values (P?<?.002). On NIMV, less than 50% of patient efforts resulted in a ventilator breath, which was not improved with a nasal clip (P?>?.07)). However, as NIMV synchrony improved (>60%), PRP on NIMV was lower than on HFNC. CONCLUSIONS: For infants, effort of breathing is similar on HFNC, NIMV, and NCPAP after extubation, regardless of flow rate or inspiratory pressure. We speculate that bi-level NIMV may be superior if high levels of synchrony can be achieved.
Authors: Li Huang; Marc Robin Mendler; Markus Waitz; Manuel Schmid; Mohammad Ahmad Hassan; Helmut D Hummler Journal: Neonatology Date: 2015-06-17 Impact factor: 4.035
Authors: Laurence Vignaux; Frédéric Vargas; Jean Roeseler; Didier Tassaux; Arnaud W Thille; Michel P Kossowsky; Laurent Brochard; Philippe Jolliet Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2009-01-29 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Juan Mayordomo-Colunga; Alberto Medina; Corsino Rey; Andrés Concha; Sergio Menéndez; Marta Los Arcos; Irene García Journal: BMC Pediatr Date: 2010-05-05 Impact factor: 2.125
Authors: J Urbano Villaescusa; S Mencía Bartolomé; E Cidoncha Escobar; J López-Herce Cid; Maria J Santiago Lozano; A Carrillo Alvarez Journal: An Pediatr (Barc) Date: 2008-01 Impact factor: 1.500
Authors: Mia Maamari; Gustavo Nino; James Bost; Yao Cheng; Anthony Sochet; Matthew Sharron Journal: J Intensive Care Med Date: 2021-01-08 Impact factor: 3.510