Comparative Study between Noninvasive Continuous Positive Airway Pressure and Hot Humidified High-flow Nasal Cannulae as a Mode of Respiratory Support in Infants with Acute Bronchiolitis in Pediatric Intensive Care Unit of a Tertiary Care Hospital

BACKGROUND: Early initiation of appropriate noninvasive respiratory support is utmost important intervention to avoid mechanical ventilation in severe bronchiolitis. AIM: This study aims to compare noninvasive continuous positive airway pressure (nCPAP) and hot humidified high-flow nasal cannulae (HHHFNC) as modes of respiratory support in infants with severe bronchiolitis. METHODS: Prospective, randomized, open-label pilot study done in a tertiary-care hospital Pediatric Intensive Care Unit (PICU). Participants: 31 infants (excluding neonates) clinically diagnosed with acute bronchiolitis having peripheral capillary oxygen saturation (SpO(2)) <92% (with room air oxygen); Respiratory Distress Assessment Index (RDAI) ≥11. Intervention: nCPAP (n = 16) or HHHFNC (n = 15), initiated at enrollment. Primary outcome: Reduction of need of mechanical ventilation assessed by improvements in (i) SpO(2)% (ii) heart rate (HR); respiratory rate; (iii) partial pressure of carbon dioxide; (iv) partial pressure of oxygen; (v) COMFORT Score; (vi) RDAI from preintervention value. Secondary outcome: (i) total duration of noninvasive ventilation support; (ii) PICU length of stay; and (iii) incidence of nasal injury (NI). RESULTS: Mean age was 3.41 ± 1.11 months (95% confidence interval 2.58–4.23). Compared to nCPAP, HHHFNC was better tolerated as indicated by better normalization of HR (P < 0.001); better COMFORT Score (P < 0.003) and lower incidence of NI (46.66% vs. 75%; P = 0.21). Improvements in other outcome measures were comparable for both groups. For both methods, no major patient complications occurred. CONCLUSION: HHHFNC is an emerging alternative to nCPAP in the management of infants with acute bronchiolitis.