Advertisement
Journal Home
Search for

Volume 154, Issue 2, Pages 177-182.e2 (February 2009)


View previous. 19 of 53 View next.

Observational Study of Humidified High-Flow Nasal Cannula Compared with Nasal Continuous Positive Airway Pressure

Andrea L. Lampland, MDaCorresponding Author Informationemail address, Brenda Plumma, Patricia A. Meyersa, Cathy T. Worwaa, Mark C. Mammel, MDab

Received 28 February 2008; received in revised form 25 April 2008; accepted 11 July 2008. published online 01 September 2008.

Refers to article:
High-Flow Nasal Cannula: A Kinder, Gentler CPAP?
Neil N. Finer, Frank L. Mannino
The Journal of Pediatrics
February 2009 (Vol. 154, Issue 2, Pages 160-162)
Full Text | Full-Text PDF (91 KB)
Objectives

To conduct an in vitro evaluation of a humidified high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) system at different flows, cannula sizes, and air leaks and also an in vivo analysis of mean end-expiratory esophageal pressure (EEEP) from nasal continuous positive airway pressure at 6 cm H2O (NCPAP+6) versus HFNC.

Study design

In the in vitro study, we measured HFNC system pressure and flow, with varying degrees of leak and with and without the use of a pressure-limiting valve. In the in vivo study, we measured EEEP in 15 newborns on NCPAP+6 and then on HFNC at 6 L/minute, with flow decreased by 1 L/minute every 30 minutes. Heart rate, respiratory rate, fraction of inspired oxygen, arterial oxygen saturation, respiratory distress syndrome score, and EEEP were recorded for each intervention. Data analysis was done using repeated-measures analysis of variance and linear regression.

Results

In the in vitro study, in the absence of leaks, the pressures were limited by the pressure-limiting valve only at flows ≥ 2 L/minute. With leaks of 30% and 50%, delivered pressures were always < 3 cm H2O. In the in vivo study, respiratory rate increased from baseline (NCPAP+6) as flow decreased (P < .02). Intrapatient and interpatient coefficients of variation were always high.

Conclusions

A pressure-limiting valve is necessary in a HFNC system. Although mean EEEP levels were similar in NCPAP+6 and HFNC, tachypnea developed as flow diminished. This system apparently cannot predict EEEP, because of interpatient and intrapatient variation.

a Infant Diagnostic & Research Center, Children's Hospitals and Clinics of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN

b Department of Pediatrics, Division of Neonatology, University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, MN

Corresponding Author InformationReprint requests: Andrea Lampland, MD, 347 N Smith Ave, Suite 505, St Paul, MN 55102

 Financial support for this study was provided by a grant from the Children's Hospitals and Clinics of Minnesota Foundation. The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

 This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov NCT00356668

PII: S0022-3476(08)00595-7

doi:10.1016/j.jpeds.2008.07.021


View previous. 19 of 53 View next.

Advertisement