High-flow nasal cannula and bilevel positive airway pressure for pediatric status asthmaticus: a single center, retrospective descriptive and comparative cohort study. (7th April 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Russi, Brett W.; Lew, Alicia; McKinley, Scott D.; Morrison, John M.; Sochet, Anthony A.
• Is Part Of: Journal of asthma. Volume 59:Number 4(2022)
• Page Start: 757
• Page End: 764
• Publication Date: 2022-04-07
• Subjects: Bilevel positive airway pressure -- high-flow nasal cannula -- noninvasive ventilation -- pediatric intensive care unit -- status asthmaticus; Asthma -- Periodicals; 616.238005
• DOI: 10.1080/02770903.2021.1872085
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0277-0903

Abstract

Abstract: Introduction: We aimed to describe patient characteristics and clinical outcomes for children hospitalized for status asthmaticus (SA) receiving high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) or bilevel positive airway pressure (BiPAP). Methods: We performed a single center, retrospective cohort study among 39 children admitted for SA aged 5–17 years from January 2016 to May 2019 to a quaternary pediatric intensive care unit (PICU). Cohorts were defined by BiPAP versus HFNC exposure and assessed to determine if differences existed in demographics, anthropometrics, comorbidities, asthma severity indices, historical factors, duration of noninvasive ventilation, and asthma-related clinical outcomes (i.e. length of stay, mechanical ventilation rates, exposure to concurrent sedatives/anxiolysis, and rate of adjunctive therapy exposure). Results: Thirty-three percent ( n = 13) received HFNC (33%) and 67% ( n = 26) BiPAP. Children receiving BiPAP had greater age (10.9 ± 3.7 vs. 6.8 ± 2.2 years, P < 0.01), asthma severity (proportion with severe NHLBI classification: 38% vs. 0%, P < 0.01; median pediatric asthma severity score: 13[12, 14] vs. 10[9, 12], P < 0.01), previous PICU admissions (62% vs. 15%, P = 0.01), frequency of prescribed anxiolysis/sedation (42% vs. 8%, P = 0.02), and median duration of continuous albuterol (1.7[1, 3.1] vs. 0.9[0.7, 1.6] days, P = 0.03) compared to those on HFNC. Those on HFNC more commonly were treated comorbid bacterial pneumonia (69% vs. 19%, P < 0.01). No differences in NIV duration, mortality, mechanical ventilation rates, or LOS were observed. Conclusions: Our data suggest a trial of BiPAP or HFNC appears well tolerated in children with SA. Prospective trials are needed to establish modality superiority and identify patient or clinical characteristics that prompt use of HFNC over BiPAP.