The effects of nasal continuous positive airway pressure and high flow nasal cannula on heart rate variability in extremely preterm infants after extubation: A randomized crossover trial

2019 ◽  
Vol 54 (6) ◽  
pp. 788-796 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samantha Latremouille ◽  
Wissam Shalish ◽  
Lara Kanbar ◽  
Philippe Lamer ◽  
Smita Rao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Rate ◽  
Heart Rate Variability ◽  
Airway Pressure ◽  
Crossover Trial ◽  
Positive Airway Pressure ◽  
High Flow ◽  
High Flow Nasal Cannula ◽  
Randomized Crossover Trial ◽  
Extremely Preterm ◽  
Extremely Preterm Infants

scholarly journals Cardiorespiratory effects of NIV-NAVA, NIPPV, and NCPAP shortly after extubation in extremely preterm infants: a randomized crossover trial

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samantha Latremouille ◽  
Monica Bhuller ◽  
Wissam Shalish ◽  
Guilherme Sant'Anna
Keyword(s):  
Airway Pressure ◽  
Crossover Trial ◽  
Mode Analysis ◽  
Positive Pressure ◽  
Neurally Adjusted Ventilatory Assist ◽  
Full Data ◽  
Non Invasive ◽  
Randomized Crossover Trial ◽  
Extremely Preterm ◽  
Extremely Preterm Infants

Objective: Investigate the cardiorespiratory effects of non-invasive neurally adjusted ventilatory assist (NIV-NAVA), non-synchronized nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV), and nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP) during the critical period shortly after extubation. Hypothesis: Levels of non-invasive pressure support provided and/or presence of synchronization can affect cardiorespiratory parameters. Study design: Randomized crossover trial. Patient-subject selection: Infants with birth weight (BW) ≤ 1250g undergoing their first planned extubation were randomly assigned to all 3 modes following extubation. Methodology: Electrocardiogram and electrical activity of the diaphragm (Edi) were recorded during 30min on each mode. Analysis of heart rate variability (HRV), diaphragmatic activity (Edi area, breath area, amplitude, inspiratory and expiratory times) and respiratory variability (RV) were compared between modes. Results: 23 enrolled infants had full data recordings and analysis: median [IQR] gestational age = 25.9 weeks [25.2-26.4], BW = 760g [595-900], and post-natal age 7 [4-19] days. There were no differences in HRV parameters between modes. During NIV-NAVA and NIPPV, diaphragmatic activity was significantly lower and RV higher than NCPAP. Delivered peak inflation pressures (PIPs) were lower during NIV-NAVA than NIPPV (14 cmH2O [13-16] vs cmH2O 16 [16-17]; p<0.001). However, due to a significantly higher proportion of assisted breaths (99% [92-103] vs. 51% [38-82]; p<0.001) NIV-NAVA provided a higher mean airway pressure (MAP)(9.4 cmH2O [8.2-10.0] vs. 8.2 cmH2O [7.6-9.3]; p=0.002). Conclusions: NIV-NAVA and NIPPV applied shortly after extubation were associated with positive cardiorespiratory effects. This effect was more evident during NIV-NAVA where patient-ventilator synchronization provided a higher MAP with lower PIPs.

scholarly journals FIRST-line support for assistance in breathing in children (FIRST-ABC): a master protocol of two randomised trials to evaluate the non-inferiority of high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) versus continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) for non-invasive respiratory support in paediatric critical care

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (8) ◽  
pp. e038002 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alvin Richards-Belle ◽  
Peter Davis ◽  
Laura Drikite ◽  
Richard Feltbower ◽  
Richard Grieve ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Critical Care ◽  
Continuous Positive Airway Pressure ◽  
Airway Pressure ◽  
Positive Airway Pressure ◽  
High Flow ◽  
Respiratory Support ◽  
High Flow Nasal Cannula ◽  
First Line ◽  
Non Invasive ◽  
Paediatric Critical Care

IntroductionEven though respiratory support is a common intervention in paediatric critical care, there is no randomised controlled trial (RCT) evidence regarding the effectiveness of two commonly used modes of non-invasive respiratory support (NRS), continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) and high-flow nasal cannula therapy (HFNC). FIRST-line support for assistance in breathing in children is a master protocol of two pragmatic non-inferiority RCTs to evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of HFNC (compared with CPAP) as the first-line mode of support in critically ill children.Methods and analysisWe will recruit participants over a 30-month period at 25 UK paediatric critical care units (paediatric intensive care units/high-dependency units). Patients are eligible if admitted/accepted for admission, aged >36 weeks corrected gestational age and <16 years, and assessed by the treating clinician to require NRS for an acute illness (step-up RCT) or within 72 hours of extubation following a period of invasive ventilation (step-down RCT). Due to the emergency nature of the treatment, written informed consent will be deferred to after randomisation. Randomisation will occur 1:1 to CPAP or HFNC, stratified by site and age (<12 vs ≥12 months). The primary outcome is time to liberation from respiratory support for a continuous period of 48 hours. A total sample size of 600 patients in each RCT will provide 90% power with a type I error rate of 2.5% (one sided) to exclude the prespecified non-inferiority margin of HR of 0.75. Primary analyses will be undertaken separately in each RCT in both the intention-to-treat and per-protocol populations.Ethics and disseminationThis master protocol received favourable ethical opinion from National Health Service East of England—Cambridge South Research Ethics Committee (reference: 19/EE/0185) and approval from the Health Research Authority (reference: 260536). Results will be disseminated via publications in peer-reviewed medical journals and presentations at national and international conferences.Trial registration numberISRCTN60048867

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document