Cargando…

A comparison of clinical efficacy between high frequency oscillatory ventilation and conventional ventilation with lung volume recruitment in pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome: A randomized controlled trial

PURPOSE: To determine the efficacy of lung volume recruitment maneuver (LVRM) with high frequency oscillatory ventilation (HFOV) on oxygenation, hemodynamic alteration, and clinical outcomes when compared to conventional mechanical ventilation (CV) in children with severe acute respiratory distress...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Samransamruajkit, Rujipat, Rassameehirun, Chavisa, Pongsanon, Khemmachart, Huntrakul, Sumalee, Deerojanawong, Jitladda, Sritippayawan, Suchada, Prapphal, Nuanchan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4810936/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27076706
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0972-5229.175940
_version_ 1782423864540659712
author Samransamruajkit, Rujipat
Rassameehirun, Chavisa
Pongsanon, Khemmachart
Huntrakul, Sumalee
Deerojanawong, Jitladda
Sritippayawan, Suchada
Prapphal, Nuanchan
author_facet Samransamruajkit, Rujipat
Rassameehirun, Chavisa
Pongsanon, Khemmachart
Huntrakul, Sumalee
Deerojanawong, Jitladda
Sritippayawan, Suchada
Prapphal, Nuanchan
author_sort Samransamruajkit, Rujipat
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: To determine the efficacy of lung volume recruitment maneuver (LVRM) with high frequency oscillatory ventilation (HFOV) on oxygenation, hemodynamic alteration, and clinical outcomes when compared to conventional mechanical ventilation (CV) in children with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). MATERIALS: We performed a randomized controlled trial and enrolled pediatric patients who were diagnosed to have severe ARDS upon pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) admission. LVRM protocol combined with HFOV or conventional mechanical ventilation was used. Baseline characteristic data, oxygenation, hemodynamic parameters, and clinical outcomes were recorded. RESULTS: Eighteen children with severe ARDS were enrolled in our study. The primary cause of ARDS was pneumonia (91.7%). Their mean age was 47.7 ± 61.2 (m) and body weight was 25.3 ± 27.1 (kg). Their initial pediatric risk of mortality score 3 and pediatric logistic organ dysfunction were 12 ± 9.2 and 15.9 ± 12.8, respectively. The initial mean oxygen index was 24.5 ± 10.4, and mean PaO(2)/FiO(2) was 80.6 ± 25. There was no difference in oxygen parameters at baseline the between two groups. There was a significant increase in PaO(2)/FiO(2) (119.2 ± 41.1, 49.6 ± 30.6, P = 0.01*) response after 1 h of LVRM with HFOV compare to CV. Hemodynamic and serious complications were not significantly affected after LVRM. The overall PICU mortality of our severe ARDS at 28 days was 16.7%. Three patients in CV with LVRM group failed to wean oxygen requirement and were cross-over to HFOV group. CONCLUSIONS: HFOV combined with LVRM in severe pediatric ARDS had superior oxygenation and tended to have better clinical effect over CV. There is no significant effect on hemodynamic parameters. Moreover, no serious complication was noted.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4810936
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-48109362016-04-13 A comparison of clinical efficacy between high frequency oscillatory ventilation and conventional ventilation with lung volume recruitment in pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome: A randomized controlled trial Samransamruajkit, Rujipat Rassameehirun, Chavisa Pongsanon, Khemmachart Huntrakul, Sumalee Deerojanawong, Jitladda Sritippayawan, Suchada Prapphal, Nuanchan Indian J Crit Care Med Research Article PURPOSE: To determine the efficacy of lung volume recruitment maneuver (LVRM) with high frequency oscillatory ventilation (HFOV) on oxygenation, hemodynamic alteration, and clinical outcomes when compared to conventional mechanical ventilation (CV) in children with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). MATERIALS: We performed a randomized controlled trial and enrolled pediatric patients who were diagnosed to have severe ARDS upon pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) admission. LVRM protocol combined with HFOV or conventional mechanical ventilation was used. Baseline characteristic data, oxygenation, hemodynamic parameters, and clinical outcomes were recorded. RESULTS: Eighteen children with severe ARDS were enrolled in our study. The primary cause of ARDS was pneumonia (91.7%). Their mean age was 47.7 ± 61.2 (m) and body weight was 25.3 ± 27.1 (kg). Their initial pediatric risk of mortality score 3 and pediatric logistic organ dysfunction were 12 ± 9.2 and 15.9 ± 12.8, respectively. The initial mean oxygen index was 24.5 ± 10.4, and mean PaO(2)/FiO(2) was 80.6 ± 25. There was no difference in oxygen parameters at baseline the between two groups. There was a significant increase in PaO(2)/FiO(2) (119.2 ± 41.1, 49.6 ± 30.6, P = 0.01*) response after 1 h of LVRM with HFOV compare to CV. Hemodynamic and serious complications were not significantly affected after LVRM. The overall PICU mortality of our severe ARDS at 28 days was 16.7%. Three patients in CV with LVRM group failed to wean oxygen requirement and were cross-over to HFOV group. CONCLUSIONS: HFOV combined with LVRM in severe pediatric ARDS had superior oxygenation and tended to have better clinical effect over CV. There is no significant effect on hemodynamic parameters. Moreover, no serious complication was noted. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2016-02 /pmc/articles/PMC4810936/ /pubmed/27076706 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0972-5229.175940 Text en Copyright: © Indian Journal of Critical Care Medicine http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial ShareAlike 3.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non commercially, as long as the author is credited and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Research Article
Samransamruajkit, Rujipat
Rassameehirun, Chavisa
Pongsanon, Khemmachart
Huntrakul, Sumalee
Deerojanawong, Jitladda
Sritippayawan, Suchada
Prapphal, Nuanchan
A comparison of clinical efficacy between high frequency oscillatory ventilation and conventional ventilation with lung volume recruitment in pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome: A randomized controlled trial
title A comparison of clinical efficacy between high frequency oscillatory ventilation and conventional ventilation with lung volume recruitment in pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome: A randomized controlled trial
title_full A comparison of clinical efficacy between high frequency oscillatory ventilation and conventional ventilation with lung volume recruitment in pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome: A randomized controlled trial
title_fullStr A comparison of clinical efficacy between high frequency oscillatory ventilation and conventional ventilation with lung volume recruitment in pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome: A randomized controlled trial
title_full_unstemmed A comparison of clinical efficacy between high frequency oscillatory ventilation and conventional ventilation with lung volume recruitment in pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome: A randomized controlled trial
title_short A comparison of clinical efficacy between high frequency oscillatory ventilation and conventional ventilation with lung volume recruitment in pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome: A randomized controlled trial
title_sort comparison of clinical efficacy between high frequency oscillatory ventilation and conventional ventilation with lung volume recruitment in pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome: a randomized controlled trial
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4810936/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27076706
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0972-5229.175940
work_keys_str_mv AT samransamruajkitrujipat acomparisonofclinicalefficacybetweenhighfrequencyoscillatoryventilationandconventionalventilationwithlungvolumerecruitmentinpediatricacuterespiratorydistresssyndromearandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT rassameehirunchavisa acomparisonofclinicalefficacybetweenhighfrequencyoscillatoryventilationandconventionalventilationwithlungvolumerecruitmentinpediatricacuterespiratorydistresssyndromearandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT pongsanonkhemmachart acomparisonofclinicalefficacybetweenhighfrequencyoscillatoryventilationandconventionalventilationwithlungvolumerecruitmentinpediatricacuterespiratorydistresssyndromearandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT huntrakulsumalee acomparisonofclinicalefficacybetweenhighfrequencyoscillatoryventilationandconventionalventilationwithlungvolumerecruitmentinpediatricacuterespiratorydistresssyndromearandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT deerojanawongjitladda acomparisonofclinicalefficacybetweenhighfrequencyoscillatoryventilationandconventionalventilationwithlungvolumerecruitmentinpediatricacuterespiratorydistresssyndromearandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT sritippayawansuchada acomparisonofclinicalefficacybetweenhighfrequencyoscillatoryventilationandconventionalventilationwithlungvolumerecruitmentinpediatricacuterespiratorydistresssyndromearandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT prapphalnuanchan acomparisonofclinicalefficacybetweenhighfrequencyoscillatoryventilationandconventionalventilationwithlungvolumerecruitmentinpediatricacuterespiratorydistresssyndromearandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT samransamruajkitrujipat comparisonofclinicalefficacybetweenhighfrequencyoscillatoryventilationandconventionalventilationwithlungvolumerecruitmentinpediatricacuterespiratorydistresssyndromearandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT rassameehirunchavisa comparisonofclinicalefficacybetweenhighfrequencyoscillatoryventilationandconventionalventilationwithlungvolumerecruitmentinpediatricacuterespiratorydistresssyndromearandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT pongsanonkhemmachart comparisonofclinicalefficacybetweenhighfrequencyoscillatoryventilationandconventionalventilationwithlungvolumerecruitmentinpediatricacuterespiratorydistresssyndromearandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT huntrakulsumalee comparisonofclinicalefficacybetweenhighfrequencyoscillatoryventilationandconventionalventilationwithlungvolumerecruitmentinpediatricacuterespiratorydistresssyndromearandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT deerojanawongjitladda comparisonofclinicalefficacybetweenhighfrequencyoscillatoryventilationandconventionalventilationwithlungvolumerecruitmentinpediatricacuterespiratorydistresssyndromearandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT sritippayawansuchada comparisonofclinicalefficacybetweenhighfrequencyoscillatoryventilationandconventionalventilationwithlungvolumerecruitmentinpediatricacuterespiratorydistresssyndromearandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT prapphalnuanchan comparisonofclinicalefficacybetweenhighfrequencyoscillatoryventilationandconventionalventilationwithlungvolumerecruitmentinpediatricacuterespiratorydistresssyndromearandomizedcontrolledtrial