key: cord-0872929-bynszxom authors: Yurtseven, Ali; Turan, Caner; Erseven, Eren; Saz, Eylem Ulas title: Comparison of heated humidified high‐flow nasal cannula flow rates (1‐L·kg·min(−1) vs 2‐L·kg·min (−1)) in the management of acute bronchiolitis date: 2019-03-18 journal: Pediatr Pulmonol DOI: 10.1002/ppul.24318 sha: 99c06178dc7a49a783f0fcefb4c94f39a8d8946a doc_id: 872929 cord_uid: bynszxom OBJECTIVE: We aimed to compare the heated humidified high‐flow nasal cannula (HHHFNC) flow rate of 1‐L·kg·min(−1) (1 L) with 2‐L·kg·min (−1) (2 L) in patients with severe bronchiolitis presenting to the pediatric emergency department. STUDY DESIGN: We performed a study in which all patients were allocated to receive these two flow rates. The primary outcome was admitted as treatment failure, which was defined as a clinical escalation in respiratory status. Secondary outcomes covered a decrease of respiratory rate (RR), heart rate (HR), the clinical respiratory score (CRS), rise of peripheral capillary oxygen saturation (SpO(2)), and rates of weaning, intubation, and intensive care unit (ICU) admission. RESULTS: One hundred and sixty‐eight cases (88 received the 1‐L flow rate and 80, the 2‐L flow rate) were included in the analyses. Treatment failure was 11.4% (10 of 88) in the 1‐L group, and 10% (8 of 80) in the 2‐L group (P = .775). Significant variation in the intubation rate or the ICU admission rate was not determined. At the 2nd hour, the rate of weaning (53.4% vs 35%; P = .017), the falling down of the CRS (−2.1 vs −1.5; P < .001), RR (−15.2 vs −11.8; P < .001), and HR (− 24.8 vs − 21.2; P < .001), and the increase of SpO (2) (4.8 vs 3.6; P < .001) were significantly more evident in the 1‐L group. CONCLUSION: HHHFNC with the 1‐L·kg·min(−1) flow rate, which provides a more frequent earlier effect, reached therapy success as high as the 2‐L·kg·min (−1) flow rate in patients with severe acute bronchiolitis. Bronchiolitis is an acute lower tract respiratory disease that is usually caused by viral infections (most commonly respiratory syncytial virus). This disease mostly affects young children less than 2 and is one of the most common reasons for presentation to the emergency departments (EDs) in infants. 1 Every year, it causes over 300 000 ED visits in the USA and over 3.4 million hospitalizations worldwide. 2, 3 Although the majority of children with bronchiolitis have a self-limited mild or moderate illness, some of them may present with severe respiratory distress and require respiratory support. 4 Numerous medications have been frequently used to manage acute bronchiolitis (eg, oxygen, hydration, bronchodilators, corticosteroids, antibiotics, antivirals, nasal decongestants, immunoglobulins), but only oxygen and hydration have been shown to demonstrably improve the condition of infants with bronchiolitis. [5] [6] [7] Therefore, the optimal treatment regimen for the management of moderate and severe bronchiolitis (SB) remains unclear. In recent years, heated humidified high-flow nasal cannula (HHHFNC) therapy has been introduced as a novel alternative method for the management of acute respiratory distress due to bronchiolitis. 8 HHHFNC can be set up easily, is safe, and well-known as a noninvasive respiratory support therapy method used in the case of respiratory distress. 9 It delivers heated and humidified high flow oxygen and does not irritate the respiratory mucosa. 10 HHHFNC is also able to generate a positive-end expiratory pressure without valve system (fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO 2 ) can be varied between 21% and 100%). 11 Evidence also indicates that HHHFNC exerts beneficial effects by reducing inspiratory resistance, washing out of the nasopharyngeal anatomical dead space, reducing metabolic work related to gas conditioning, and finally improving the airway conductance and mucociliary clearance. 10 Thus, carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) is excreted and ventilation-perfusion balance is supported. 12, 13 HHHFNC therapy has been shown to be more efficient than standard care and to reduce the rate of intubation/invasive ventilation in the management of acute SB. [14] [15] [16] Despite these beneficial effects of HHHFNC, it has not been recommended by international guidelines. Nevertheless, the data are still limited on using this modality in ED setting. 17 In young children, few clinical studies compare the effects of various HHHFNC flow rates, and almost all of them were conducted in the intensive care unit (ICU). 18, 19 The optimal flow rate is still unknown. Physicians mostly select HHHFNC flow rates empirically without consideration of a patientʼs weight and age. There is no study comparing flow rates on bronchiolitis 2 L·kg·min −1 with 1 L·kg·min −1 in the ED setting. Therefore, we performed a prospective clinical study to compare the HHHFNC flow rate of 1-L·kg·min −1 with 2-L·kg·min −1 in patients with SB admitted to our ED. The cannula size was selected as not to be wider than half the diameter of the patientʼs nares. Sedation was achieved by oral feeding for the majority of patients (breastfeeding was preferred if possible), but if necessary, sedative drugs such as dexmedetomidine or midazolam were administered. Before starting the study, the ED nurses and physicians were all trained about the HHHFNC therapy process by the investigators. The failure rates of HHHFNC therapy with a flow rate of 1-L·kg·min −1 and 2-L·kg·min −1 have been shown to be 13% and 25%, respectively. These rates were estimated from principal studies utilizing two various flow rates. 15, 16, [21] [22] [23] [24] According to the power calculation, 168 patients would be required to ensure the power of 80% and P < .05. All analyses that included all children were performed with SPSS for Windows (version 22.0; SPSS Inc, IL). The failure rates were compared with a χ 2 test. Comparison of the changes in RR, HR, the CRS, and SpO 2 after 2 hours of the therapy were performed using linear mixed models with random intercepts for clusters. Differences of the baseline characteristics of two groups (sex, age, comorbidity, prematurity, admitted season, the results of nasopharyngeal aspirate samples, the beginning values of RR, HR, the CRS, SpO 2, pH, PO 2 , and PCO 2 ) were analyzed with χ 2 test, Studentʼs t test, and Mann-Whitney U test, as appropriate and were presented as mean differences with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and P-values. Therapy effects were reported as hazard ratios with 95% CIs evaluated from the Cox-proportional hazard model. A two-tailed probability value (P) of less than .05 was considered significant. During the study period, 2665 patients presented to the ED with a diagnosis of acute bronchiolitis and 274 (10%) had SB. Final analysis was performed for 168 (6.3%) patients. After allocation, 88 patients were assigned to receive HHHFNC with a flow rate of 1-L·kg·min −1 and 80 patients were assigned to receive 2-L·kg·min −1 (Figure 1 ). The mean age was 10,1 ± 6.7 months, and 73% (n = 123) were male. A single viral pathogen was detected in 97 (58%) cases and multiple viral agents in 47 (28%). Multiple viral agents were more likely determined in a group of HHHFNC 1-L·kg·min −1 (P = .022). Another baseline demographic and physiological characteristics of the patients were comparable in the two groups (Table 1) Table 2 ). At the 2nd hour of the therapy, the weaning rate was higher in the 1-L·kg·min −1 group than the 2-L·kg·min −1 group (53.4% vs 35%; HR 1.39 [95% CI, 0.92-2.10]; P = .017; Table 2 ). The reductions in the CRS (P < .001), in RR (P < .001), and in HR (P < .001), and the increase in SpO 2 (P < .001) were significantly higher in the 1-L·kg·min −1 group than the 2-L·kg·min −1 group at the 2nd hour of evaluation when compared with the baseline (Table 2) . No child died and therapy-related side effects were not developed (such as pneumothorax or pressure injuries). In this single-centre, prospective study, we compared the effectiveness of two HHHFNC flow rates to support young children' respiratory distress due to SB. The use of the 2-L·kg·min −1 flow rate did not reduce the risk of treatment failure compared with the flow rate of 1 L·kg·min −1 . No marked difference was found in the rate of intubation and ICU admission between the two groups. At the 2nd hour of the therapy, the 1-L·kg·min −1 flow rate was significantly more efficient in the rate of weaning, the CRS, RR, HR, and SpO 2 than in the 2-L·kg·min −1 flow rate. HHHFNC has been used widely for patients with respiratory distress in all pediatric units of hospitals in many places across the world. However, some questions such as "which dose should be preferred for infants with bronchiolitis?" about this respiratory support modality still have not found an answer. 18 Although previously the 1-L·kg·min −1 flow rate or 4 to 8 L/min flow rate was frequently used in patients with bronchiolitis, currently most centers choose the 2-L·kg·min −1 flow rate. 14, 16, [21] [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] [27] But this modification is based on only a few physiological studies, and there still has been no satisfactory clinical data to determine the optimal flow rate required for clinical benefit. [28] [29] [30] According to the physiological studies, a flow rate ≥2-L·kg·min −1 is required to achieve a clinically adequate pharyngeal pressure, with improved breathing pattern and reduced respiratory muscles workload, in patients with bronchiolitis. 29, 30 Contrary to these studies, Milesi et al 19 published a randomized, prospective, and multicenter comparison study of two HHHFNC flow rates, and they indicate that 3 L·kg·min −1 was not superior to 2 L·kg·min −1 when used for the primary management of moderate or SB. Moreover, the 3 L·kg·min −1 flow rate was associated with a higher rate of discomfort and with a longer stay in the ICU. Similarly, our findings also supported these results and showed that using the increased flow rate in children with SB was not associated with treatment success. Although increasing the flow rate might generate more effective positive airway pressure, this hypothesis seemed realistic physiologically but not clinically. Also, it may be that the higher expiratory resistance imposed by a higher flow-rate offsets any benefit of improving mean airway pressure. One of the most important goals of using HHHFNC in patients with respiratory distress in the ED is an early response. A decrease in RR, in HR, in CRS and an increase in SpO 2 were frequently chosen as early predictors of a good response to HHHFNC. 21 Heart rate (beat/min) there were manifest differences in these early predictors between the two groups at the 2nd-hour evaluation. Improvement in the early predictors was much better (17%-40%) in the 1-L·kg·min −1 group than the 2-L·kg·min −1 group. As the second outcome, the early weaning rate was also higher (nearly 50%) in the 1-L·kg·min −1 group, and it probably depends on the improvement of the early predictors. The differences may be explained by more frequent discomfort, which occurs at a higher flow rate. HHHFNC treatment achieved a wide popularity to reduce the rate of intubation and ICU admission. Previous studies reported that the overall rate of intubation and ICU admission declined 50%-70% in patients with bronchiolitis by HHHFNC therapy. 14, 15, 31, 32 However, the optimal flow rate to provide the lowest intubation rate and ICU admission in the ED setting is still unknown. In Milesi et al's study, the intubation rate was shown to be higher in the 3-L·kg·min −1 group than the 2-L·kg·min −1 group (6.9% vs 2.8%), but this difference was not statistically significant. 16 The present study also found that increasing the flow rate did not reduce the rate of intubation and ICU admission in the management of SB in young children. This study had some limitations. First, since it was a single center, its findings might not be generalizable to other settings. Second, for certain visual reasons, the physicians were not blinded to the regulated flow rate. Therefore, their assessments may have been influenced. Third, we considered that the study was conducted in the ED; that is why following up the patients 24 hours is enough. However, this decision may have caused us to lose some data. The last one, the patients were not allocated to receive either therapy (1:1) using stratified randomization. Hence, a numerical difference occurred between the two groups. The results may have been affected by this diversity. In conclusion, this study showed that HHHFNC therapy with the 2-L·kg·min −1 flow rate was not clinically more effective than 1-L·kg·min −1 in patients with SB in the ED. The 1-L·kg·min −1 flow-rate ensured earlier impact and was well tolerated. It should be chosen for patients with SB in the EDs. Viral bronchiolitis in children Temporal trends in emergency department visits for bronchiolitis in the United States Global burden of acute lower respiratory infections due to respiratory syncytial virus in young children: a systematic review and meta-analysis Risk factors for respiratory decompensation among healthy infants with bronchiolitis Bronchodilators for bronchiolitis Clinical practice guideline: the diagnosis, management, and prevention of bronchiolitis Viral bronchiolitis Non-invasive ventilation or high-flow oxygen therapy: when to choose one over the other? Respirology High flow nasal cannula in children: a literature review The use of high-flow nasal cannula in the pediatric emergency department High flow nasal cannula in the emergency department: indications, safety and effectiveness CPAP and high-flow nasal cannula oxygen in bronchiolitis The evidence for high flow nasal cannula devices in infants Use of high-flow nasal cannula support in the emergency department reduces the need for intubation in pediatric acute respiratory insufficiency High-flow nasal cannula use in children with respiratory distress in the emergency department: predicting the need for subsequent intubation Reduced intubation rates for infants after introduction of high-flow nasal prong oxygen delivery Humidified high-flow nasal cannula oxygen for bronchiolitis: should we go with the flow? High flow nasal cannula flow rates: New data worth the weight A multicenter randomized controlled trial of a 3-L/kg/min versus 2-L/kg/min high-flow nasal cannula flow rate in young infants with severe viral bronchiolitis (TRAMONTANE 2) Use of a respiratory clinical score among different providers Is there a role for humidified heated highflow nasal cannula therapy in paediatric emergency departments High flow nasal cannula (HFNC) versus nasal continuous positive airway pressure (nCPAP) for the initial respiratory management of acute viral bronchiolitis in young infants: a multicenter randomized controlled trial (TRAMONTANE study) High-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy for infants with bronchiolitis: pilot study High-flow warm humidified oxygen versus standard low-flow nasal cannula oxygen for moderate bronchiolitis (HFWHO RCT): an open, phase 4, randomised controlled trial Early predictors of unresponsiveness to high-flow nasal cannula therapy in a pediatric emergency department First-line treatment using highflow nasal cannula for children with severe bronchiolitis: applicability and risk factors for failure A randomized trial of highflow oxygen therapy in infants with bronchiolitis The relationship between high flow nasal cannula flow rate and effort of breathing in children Is treatment with a high flow nasal cannula effective in acute viral bronchiolitis? A physiologic study The effect of high flow nasal cannula therapy on the work of breathing in infants with bronchiolitis High flow nasal cannulae therapy in infants with bronchiolitis Burden of disease and change in practice in critically ill infants with bronchiolitis Comparison of heated humidified high-flow nasal cannula flow rates (1-L·kg·min −1 vs 2-L·kg·min −1 ) in the management of acute bronchiolitis The authors thank the nurses and residents of the ED, who worked so hard for the study. The authors declare that there is no conflict of interests ORCID Caner Turan http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9469-5162