Intrapulmonary percussive ventilation for children with bronchiolitis on non-Invasive Ventilation support

Cavari Yuval, Shlomo Tal Levy, Neeman Eitan, T. Ben, Leder Michal, Yarza Shaked, Lazar Isaac
{"title":"Intrapulmonary percussive ventilation for children with bronchiolitis on non-Invasive Ventilation support","authors":"Cavari Yuval, Shlomo Tal Levy, Neeman Eitan, T. Ben, Leder Michal, Yarza Shaked, Lazar Isaac","doi":"10.17352/ojpch.000042","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: Pediatric Intensive Care (PICU) admission of children with bronchiolitis as well as the use of Non-Invasive Ventilation (NIV) are increasing. The current treatment for bronchiolitis is supportive, and there are no specific studies addressing this group of severe bronchiolitis patients supported with NIV. Intrapulmonary Percussive Ventilation (IPV) is a lung recruitment physical therapy technique used in our PICU to augment lung aeration and improve gas exchange. We hypothesized that IPV treatment can be used to improve the clinical course of infants on NIV support suffering from bronchiolitis. Design: A prospective, open, randomized study. Setting: Single-center Pediatric ICU Patients: Children less than 2 years old admitted to our PICU between November 2016 and April 2018 with a diagnosis of bronchiolitis who were prescribed noninvasive positive pressure ventilation as their sole respiratory treatment modality Interventions: Patients were randomly assigned to two intervention groups: IPV vs. control (standard treatment). Measurements and main results: Thirty-eight infants with bronchiolitis treated with NIV support were randomized into two groups. The probability of a superior outcome (less chance of invasive mechanical ventilation and fewer PICU days) was 62.7% (95% CI, 45%-77%, p = 0.18) in the IPV group compared to the control group. Among the IPV group, there were no failures that required intubation in comparison to three intubations (13.6%) among the control group (p = 0.24). For the IPV group, the PICU length of stay (LOS) was 4.13 ± 2.45 days, compared to 6.18 ± 4.72 for the inhalation group. This difference was not statistically significant. Conclusions: In this single-center study, the use of IPV had no adverse reactions. The study failed to show a statistically significant effect of IPV treatment on the course of hospitalization of patients with bronchiolitis on NIV support in the PICU. Trial registration: Clinical Trials.gov NCT03037801.","PeriodicalId":140839,"journal":{"name":"Open Journal of Pediatrics and Child Health","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Open Journal of Pediatrics and Child Health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17352/ojpch.000042","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Pediatric Intensive Care (PICU) admission of children with bronchiolitis as well as the use of Non-Invasive Ventilation (NIV) are increasing. The current treatment for bronchiolitis is supportive, and there are no specific studies addressing this group of severe bronchiolitis patients supported with NIV. Intrapulmonary Percussive Ventilation (IPV) is a lung recruitment physical therapy technique used in our PICU to augment lung aeration and improve gas exchange. We hypothesized that IPV treatment can be used to improve the clinical course of infants on NIV support suffering from bronchiolitis. Design: A prospective, open, randomized study. Setting: Single-center Pediatric ICU Patients: Children less than 2 years old admitted to our PICU between November 2016 and April 2018 with a diagnosis of bronchiolitis who were prescribed noninvasive positive pressure ventilation as their sole respiratory treatment modality Interventions: Patients were randomly assigned to two intervention groups: IPV vs. control (standard treatment). Measurements and main results: Thirty-eight infants with bronchiolitis treated with NIV support were randomized into two groups. The probability of a superior outcome (less chance of invasive mechanical ventilation and fewer PICU days) was 62.7% (95% CI, 45%-77%, p = 0.18) in the IPV group compared to the control group. Among the IPV group, there were no failures that required intubation in comparison to three intubations (13.6%) among the control group (p = 0.24). For the IPV group, the PICU length of stay (LOS) was 4.13 ± 2.45 days, compared to 6.18 ± 4.72 for the inhalation group. This difference was not statistically significant. Conclusions: In this single-center study, the use of IPV had no adverse reactions. The study failed to show a statistically significant effect of IPV treatment on the course of hospitalization of patients with bronchiolitis on NIV support in the PICU. Trial registration: Clinical Trials.gov NCT03037801.
无创通气支持下毛细支气管炎患儿肺内冲击通气的研究
目的:毛细支气管炎儿童重症监护(PICU)住院及无创通气(NIV)的使用越来越多。目前对毛细支气管炎的治疗是支持性的,没有针对这组重症毛细支气管炎患者的专门研究支持NIV。肺内冲击通气(IPV)是一种肺补充物理治疗技术,用于我们的PICU,以增加肺通气和改善气体交换。我们假设IPV治疗可用于改善婴儿在NIV支持下患有细支气管炎的临床病程。设计:前瞻性、开放性、随机研究。背景:单中心儿科ICU患者:2016年11月至2018年4月期间入住PICU的未满2岁儿童,诊断为毛细支气管炎,并给予无创正压通气作为唯一呼吸治疗方式。干预措施:患者随机分为两个干预组:IPV组与对照组(标准治疗组)。测量和主要结果:38例接受NIV支持治疗的毛细支气管炎婴儿随机分为两组。与对照组相比,IPV组获得更好结果的概率(有创机械通气机会减少,PICU天数减少)为62.7% (95% CI, 45%-77%, p = 0.18)。IPV组无插管失败,对照组为3次(13.6%)(p = 0.24)。IPV组PICU住院时间(LOS)为4.13±2.45天,吸入组为6.18±4.72天。这一差异无统计学意义。结论:在这项单中心研究中,IPV的使用没有不良反应。本研究未能显示IPV治疗对PICU中使用NIV支持的毛细支气管炎患者住院时间有统计学意义的影响。试验注册:Clinical Trials.gov NCT03037801。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信