High-Flow Nasal Cannula versus Continuous Positive Airway Pressure in Critical Bronchiolitis: A Randomized Controlled Pilot
Repository Usage Stats
<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:p>We conducted a randomized controlled pilot study in infants with critical bronchiolitis (n = 63) comparing high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC, n = 35) to continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP, n = 28). The primary outcome was treatment failure, defined as the need for bilevel positive pressure ventilation or endotracheal intubation. Treatment failure occurred in 10 patients (35.7%) in the CPAP group and 13 patients (37.1%) in the HFNC group (p = 0.88). Pediatric intensive care unit length of stay was similar between the CPAP and HFNC groups (5 [4–7] days and 5 [4–8] days, p = 0.46, respectively). In this pilot study, treatment with HFNC resulted in a rate of treatment failure similar to CPAP.</jats:p>
Published Version (Please cite this version)10.1055/s-0040-1709656
Publication InfoRotta, Alexandre; Cesar, Regina Grigolli; Bispo, Bibiane Ramos Pinheiro; Felix, Priscilla Helena Costa Alves; Modolo, Maria Carolina Caparica; Souza, Andreia Aparecida Freitas; & Horigoshi, Nelson K (n.d.). High-Flow Nasal Cannula versus Continuous Positive Airway Pressure in Critical Bronchiolitis: A Randomized Controlled Pilot. Journal of Pediatric Intensive Care. 10.1055/s-0040-1709656. Retrieved from https://hdl.handle.net/10161/20572.
This is constructed from limited available data and may be imprecise. To cite this article, please review & use the official citation provided by the journal.
More InfoShow full item record