Suppr超能文献

高流量鼻导管疗法与持续气道正压通气疗法对儿科重症监护病房急性危重病患儿撤机效果的随机临床试验

Effect of High-Flow Nasal Cannula Therapy vs Continuous Positive Airway Pressure Therapy on Liberation From Respiratory Support in Acutely Ill Children Admitted to Pediatric Critical Care Units: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

机构信息

Section of Anaesthetics, Pain Medicine, and Intensive Care, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, England.

Children's Acute Transport Service, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust, London, England.

出版信息

JAMA. 2022 Jul 12;328(2):162-172. doi: 10.1001/jama.2022.9615.

Abstract

IMPORTANCE

The optimal first-line mode of noninvasive respiratory support for acutely ill children is not known.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the noninferiority of high-flow nasal cannula therapy (HFNC) as the first-line mode of noninvasive respiratory support for acute illness, compared with continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP), for time to liberation from all forms of respiratory support.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Pragmatic, multicenter, randomized noninferiority clinical trial conducted in 24 pediatric critical care units in the United Kingdom among 600 acutely ill children aged 0 to 15 years who were clinically assessed to require noninvasive respiratory support, recruited between August 2019 and November 2021, with last follow-up completed in March 2022.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were randomized 1:1 to commence either HFNC at a flow rate based on patient weight (n = 301) or CPAP of 7 to 8 cm H2O (n = 299).

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was time from randomization to liberation from respiratory support, defined as the start of a 48-hour period during which a participant was free from all forms of respiratory support (invasive or noninvasive), assessed against a noninferiority margin of an adjusted hazard ratio of 0.75. Seven secondary outcomes were assessed, including mortality at critical care unit discharge, intubation within 48 hours, and use of sedation.

RESULTS

Of the 600 randomized children, consent was not obtained for 5 (HFNC: 1; CPAP: 4) and respiratory support was not started in 22 (HFNC: 5; CPAP: 17); 573 children (HFNC: 295; CPAP: 278) were included in the primary analysis (median age, 9 months; 226 girls [39%]). The median time to liberation in the HFNC group was 52.9 hours (95% CI, 46.0-60.9 hours) vs 47.9 hours (95% CI, 40.5-55.7 hours) in the CPAP group (absolute difference, 5.0 hours [95% CI -10.1 to 17.4 hours]; adjusted hazard ratio 1.03 [1-sided 97.5% CI, 0.86-∞]). This met the criterion for noninferiority. Of the 7 prespecified secondary outcomes, 3 were significantly lower in the HFNC group: use of sedation (27.7% vs 37%; adjusted odds ratio, 0.59 [95% CI, 0.39-0.88]); mean duration of critical care stay (5 days vs 7.4 days; adjusted mean difference, -3 days [95% CI, -5.1 to -1 days]); and mean duration of acute hospital stay (13.8 days vs 19.5 days; adjusted mean difference, -7.6 days [95% CI, -13.2 to -1.9 days]). The most common adverse event was nasal trauma (HFNC: 6/295 [2.0%]; CPAP: 18/278 [6.5%]).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Among acutely ill children clinically assessed to require noninvasive respiratory support in a pediatric critical care unit, HFNC compared with CPAP met the criterion for noninferiority for time to liberation from respiratory support.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN.org Identifier: ISRCTN60048867.

摘要

重要性

急性疾病儿童的无创呼吸支持的最佳一线模式尚不清楚。

目的

评估与持续气道正压通气 (CPAP) 相比,高流量鼻导管治疗 (HFNC) 作为急性疾病无创呼吸支持的一线模式,在从所有形式的呼吸支持中解脱的时间方面是否不劣于 CPAP。

设计、地点和参与者:在英国 24 家儿科重症监护病房进行的实用、多中心、随机非劣效性临床试验,纳入了 600 名年龄在 0 至 15 岁之间、临床评估需要无创呼吸支持的急性疾病儿童,招募时间为 2019 年 8 月至 2021 年 11 月,最后随访时间为 2022 年 3 月。

干预措施

患者以 1:1 的比例随机分配至 HFNC 组(根据患者体重设定流速)或 CPAP 组(7 至 8 cm H2O)。

主要结果和测量指标

主要结局是从随机分组到解除呼吸支持的时间,定义为开始持续 48 小时的时间段,在此期间患者无需任何形式的呼吸支持(包括侵入性或非侵入性),与调整后的危险比 0.75 的非劣效性边界进行比较。评估了 7 个次要结局,包括重症监护病房出院时的死亡率、48 小时内插管以及镇静的使用。

结果

在 600 名随机分配的儿童中,有 5 名(HFNC:1 名;CPAP:4 名)未获得同意,有 22 名(HFNC:5 名;CPAP:17 名)未开始接受呼吸支持;573 名儿童(HFNC:295 名;CPAP:278 名)纳入主要分析(中位数年龄为 9 个月;226 名女孩[39%])。HFNC 组的中位解脱时间为 52.9 小时(95%CI,46.0-60.9 小时),CPAP 组为 47.9 小时(95%CI,40.5-55.7 小时)(绝对差异,5.0 小时[95%CI-10.1 至 17.4 小时];调整后的危险比 1.03[1 侧 97.5%CI,0.86-∞])。这符合非劣效性标准。在 7 个预设的次要结局中,HFNC 组有 3 个显著更低:镇静的使用(27.7%比 37%;调整后的优势比,0.59[95%CI,0.39-0.88]);重症监护病房停留时间的平均天数(5 天比 7.4 天;调整后的平均差异,-3 天[95%CI,-5.1 至-1 天]);以及急性住院时间的平均天数(13.8 天比 19.5 天;调整后的平均差异,-7.6 天[95%CI,-13.2 至-1.9 天])。最常见的不良事件是鼻创伤(HFNC:6/295[2.0%];CPAP:18/278[6.5%])。

结论和相关性

在儿科重症监护病房中临床评估需要无创呼吸支持的急性疾病儿童中,与 CPAP 相比,HFNC 满足了解除呼吸支持时间的非劣效性标准。

试验注册

ISRCTN.org 标识符:ISRCTN60048867。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

5
Current Consent Models Perpetuate Ignorance in Pediatric Critical Care.当前的同意模式使儿科重症监护中的无知长期存在。
Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2025 May 1;26(5):e748-e750. doi: 10.1097/PCC.0000000000003730. Epub 2025 Mar 14.

本文引用的文献

2
High flow nasal cannula in the pediatric intensive care unit.高流量鼻导管在儿科重症监护病房中的应用。
Expert Rev Respir Med. 2022 Apr;16(4):409-417. doi: 10.1080/17476348.2022.2049761. Epub 2022 Mar 7.

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验