• J Pilar, V Modesto I Alapont, Y M Lopez-Fernandez, O Lopez-Macias, D Garcia-Urabayen, and I Amores-Hernandez.
• PICU, Cruces University Hospital, Plaza de Cruces s/n, Barakaldo 48903, Spain. Electronic address: fco.javier.pilarorive@osakidetza.eus.
• Med Intensiva. 2017 Oct 1; 41 (7): 418-424.

IntroductionThe present study describes our experience with the high-flow humidified nasal cannula (HFNC) versus non-invasive ventilation (NIV) in children with severe acute asthma exacerbation (SA).MethodsAn observational study of a retrospective cohort of 42 children with SA admitted to a Pediatric Intensive Care Unit (PICU) for non-invasive respiratory support was made. The primary outcome measure was failure of initial respiratory support (need to escalate from HFNC to NIV or from NIV to invasive ventilation). Secondary outcome measures were the duration of respiratory support and PICU length of stay (LOS).ResultsForty-two children met the inclusion criteria. Twenty (47.6%) received HFNC and 22 (52.3%) NIV as initial respiratory support. There were no treatment failures in the NIV group. However, 8 children (40%) in the HFNC group required escalation to NIV. The PICU LOS was similar in both the NIV and HFNC groups. However, on considering the HFNC failure subgroup, the median length of respiratory support was 3-fold longer (63h) and the PICU LOS was also longer compared with the rest of subjects exhibiting treatment success.ConclusionsDespite its obvious limitations, this observational study could suggest that HFNC in some subjects with SA may delay NIV support and potentially cause longer respiratory support, and longer PICU LOS.Copyright © 2017 Elsevier España, S.L.U. y SEMICYUC. All rights reserved.

36 keywords...

hide…