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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |