HFNCandEOB: HFNC Flow Titration and Effort of Breathing in the PICU
Study Details
Study Description
Brief Summary
High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) is a method of non-invasive respiratory support used to decrease the effort of breathing (EOB) in patients with a wide variety of respiratory diseases in the pediatric intensive care unit. While its use has shown association with decreased rates of mechanical ventilation, there is a paucity of data examining its direct effect upon objective measurements of EOB. This study will aim to evaluate objective measurements of EOB in response to different levels of HFNC support, characterize the natural course of respiratory diseases treated with HFNC, evaluate changes in EOB secondary to the administration of supplemental medical therapies used in conjunction with HFNC, and compare different physiologic metrics for quantifying EOB in patients on HFNC.
Condition or Disease | Intervention/Treatment | Phase |
---|---|---|
|
N/A |
Study Design
Arms and Interventions
Arm | Intervention/Treatment |
---|---|
Other: Fisher & Paykel high flow nasal cannula All participants in the study were on one or two high flow nasal cannula (HFNC) delivery systems. All were measured on the Fisher & Paykel HFNC delivery system. The flow rate of the HFNC was adjusted to determine if there exists a change in their effort of breathing. |
Device: Fisher & Paykel high flow nasal cannula
Measurements of effort of breathing will be obtained at flow rates of 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, and 2.0 L/kg/min. Adequate time will be allowed at each flow rate for stabilization of EOB and flow levels will be trialed in a random order, each being trialed for approximately 5 minutes.
|
Other: Vapotherm high flow nasal cannula All participants in the study were on one or two high flow nasal cannula (HFNC) delivery systems. A subgroup was measured on the Vapotherm HFNC delivery system. The flow rate of the HFNC was adjusted to determine if there exists a change in their effort of breathing. |
Device: Vapotherm high flow nasal cannula
Measurements of effort of breathing will be obtained at flow rates of 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, and 2.0 L/kg/min. Adequate time will be allowed at each flow rate for stabilization of EOB and flow levels will be trialed in a random order, each being trialed for approximately 5 minutes.
|
Outcome Measures
Primary Outcome Measures
- Percent Change in Pressure-rate Product (PRP) as a Function of Increasing HFNC Flow Rate on Both Types of HFNC Delivery System (FP and VT) [median percent change in PRP over 5 minute measurement period]
PRP is a validated objective metric of effort of breathing which is derived from the product of the peak-to-trough change in esophageal pressure (in cmH20) and the respiratory rate (breaths per minute). The percent change in PRP is derived from the quotient of the absolute PRP at increased HFNC flow rates (1.0, 1.5, and 2.0 L/kg/min) divided by the absolute PRP at a baseline HFNC flow rate (0.5 L/kg/min). Percent change in PRP was used because a) there was a large degree of heterogeneity in baseline absolute PRP values in our study population based upon patient size, disease severity, and time point of illness, and b) we allowed for repeated measures on the same patient which would bias absolute PRP values in favor of those who were measured more frequently. It was not pre-specified to compare the two different HFNC delivery systems.
Secondary Outcome Measures
- Pressure-rate Product (PRP) as a Function of Increasing HFNC Flow Rate on Both Types of HFNC Delivery System (FP and VT) [median PRP over a 5 minute period]
PRP is a validated objective metric of effort of breathing which is derived from the product of the peak-to-trough change in esophageal pressure (in cmH20) and the respiratory rate (breaths per minute). These values were obtained from 5 minute flow titration periods. For this outcome, the PRP was obtained for all titrations on both types of HFNC delivery system (FP and VT). It was not pre-specified to compare the two different HFNC delivery systems.
- Phase Angle as a Function of Increasing HFNC Flow Rate on Both Types of HFNC Delivery System (FP and VT) [median phase angle over a 5 minute period]
Phase angle is a measure of asynchrony between thoracic and abdominal breathing compartments that has correlated with increased effort of breathing. It is derived by measuring the relative expansion of these two breathing compartments and describing the synchrony between them as an angle (theta). For this outcome, the phase angle was obtained for all titrations on both types of HFNC delivery system (FP and VT). It was not pre-specified to compare the two different HFNC delivery systems.
- Percent Change in Pressure-rate Product (PRP) From Baseline as a Function of Increasing HFNC Flow Rate, Comparing Different HFNC Delivery Systems [median PRP over a 5 minute period]
For this outcome, a subgroup of patients (N=12) were examined who had PRP measurements obtained on two different HFNC delivery systems (Fisher & Paykel (FP) and Vapotherm (VT)) in back-to-back flow titration periods. With one exception, patients were first studied on the FP and then transitioned to the VT HFNC delivery system.
- Percent Change in Pressure-rate Product (PRP) From Baseline as a Function of Increasing HFNC Flow Rate, Comparing Weight-Stratified Subgroups on Both Types of HFNC Delivery System (FP and VT) [medain percent change in PRP over a 5 minute period]
To assess the relationship between patient size and dose-response of HFNC flow rate, we compared subgroups stratified by weight (patients <8 kg and >8 kg). For this outcome, the median percent change in PRP was obtained for all titrations on both types of HFNC delivery system (FP and VT). It was not pre-specified to compare the two different HFNC delivery systems.
- Maximum Percent Change in Pressure-rate Product (PRP) From Baseline as a Function of Increasing HFNC Flow Rate, Comparing Weight-Stratified Subgroups on Both Types of HFNC Delivery System (FP and VT) [median of the maximum percent change in PRP over a 5 minute period]
Exploratory analysis of patients by further stratified weight groupings (<5 kg, 5-8 kg, and >8 kg) was performed to determine the greatest observed benefit of HFNC flow titration in patients of different sizes. For this outcome, the maximum percent change in PRP was obtained for all titrations on both types of HFNC delivery system (FP and VT). It was not pre-specified to compare the two different HFNC delivery systems.
Eligibility Criteria
Criteria
Inclusion Criteria:
- All participants less than or equal to three years old admitted to the PICU placed on high flow nasal cannula will be considered eligible for the study.
Exclusion Criteria:
- Participants will be excluded if they have a corrected gestational age less than 37 weeks or contraindications to nasoesophageal catheter placement (nasopharyngeal or esophageal abnormalities) or RIP bands (abdominal wall defects such as omphalocele). Patients greater than three years of age will be excluded.
Contacts and Locations
Locations
Site | City | State | Country | Postal Code | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Children's Hospital Los Angeles | Los Angeles | California | United States | 90027 |
Sponsors and Collaborators
- Children's Hospital Los Angeles
Investigators
None specified.Study Documents (Full-Text)
None provided.More Information
Additional Information:
Publications
- Allen JL, Wolfson MR, McDowell K, Shaffer TH. Thoracoabdominal asynchrony in infants with airflow obstruction. Am Rev Respir Dis. 1990 Feb;141(2):337-42.
- Bekhof J, Reimink R, Brand PL. Systematic review: insufficient validation of clinical scores for the assessment of acute dyspnoea in wheezing children. Paediatr Respir Rev. 2014 Mar;15(1):98-112. doi: 10.1016/j.prrv.2013.08.004. Epub 2013 Oct 11. Review.
- Bellani G, Pesenti A. Assessing effort and work of breathing. Curr Opin Crit Care. 2014 Jun;20(3):352-8. doi: 10.1097/MCC.0000000000000089. Review.
- Collett PW, Perry C, Engel LA. Pressure-time product, flow, and oxygen cost of resistive breathing in humans. J Appl Physiol (1985). 1985 Apr;58(4):1263-72.
- Frizzola M, Miller TL, Rodriguez ME, Zhu Y, Rojas J, Hesek A, Stump A, Shaffer TH, Dysart K. High-flow nasal cannula: impact on oxygenation and ventilation in an acute lung injury model. Pediatr Pulmonol. 2011 Jan;46(1):67-74. doi: 10.1002/ppul.21326. Epub 2010 Nov 23.
- Gadomski AM, Scribani MB. Bronchodilators for bronchiolitis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014 Jun 17;(6):CD001266. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001266.pub4. Review.
- Glezen P, Denny FW. Epidemiology of acute lower respiratory disease in children. N Engl J Med. 1973 Mar 8;288(10):498-505.
- Green M, Brayer AF, Schenkman KA, Wald ER. Duration of hospitalization in previously well infants with respiratory syncytial virus infection. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 1989 Sep;8(9):601-5.
- Hartling L, Bialy LM, Vandermeer B, Tjosvold L, Johnson DW, Plint AC, Klassen TP, Patel H, Fernandes RM. Epinephrine for bronchiolitis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011 Jun 15;(6):CD003123. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003123.pub3. Review.
- Klein M, Reynolds LG. Relief of sleep-related oropharyngeal airway obstruction by continuous insufflation of the pharynx. Lancet. 1986 Apr 26;1(8487):935-9.
- KRIEGER I, WHITTEN CF. WORK OF RESPIRATION IN BRONCHIOLITIS. Am J Dis Child. 1964 Apr;107:386-92.
- Lampland AL, Plumm B, Meyers PA, Worwa CT, Mammel MC. Observational study of humidified high-flow nasal cannula compared with nasal continuous positive airway pressure. J Pediatr. 2009 Feb;154(2):177-82. doi: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2008.07.021. Epub 2008 Aug 30.
- Lavizzari A, Veneroni C, Colnaghi M, Ciuffini F, Zannin E, Fumagalli M, Mosca F, DellacĂ RL. Respiratory mechanics during NCPAP and HHHFNC at equal distending pressures. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2014 Jul;99(4):F315-20. Epub 2014 Apr 30.
- Lee JH, Rehder KJ, Williford L, Cheifetz IM, Turner DA. Use of high flow nasal cannula in critically ill infants, children, and adults: a critical review of the literature. Intensive Care Med. 2013 Feb;39(2):247-57. doi: 10.1007/s00134-012-2743-5. Epub 2012 Nov 10. Review.
- Mayfield S, Bogossian F, O'Malley L, Schibler A. High-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy for infants with bronchiolitis: pilot study. J Paediatr Child Health. 2014 May;50(5):373-8. doi: 10.1111/jpc.12509. Epub 2014 Feb 25.
- McKiernan C, Chua LC, Visintainer PF, Allen H. High flow nasal cannulae therapy in infants with bronchiolitis. J Pediatr. 2010 Apr;156(4):634-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2009.10.039. Epub 2009 Dec 29.
- Milési C, Baleine J, Matecki S, Durand S, Combes C, Novais AR, Cambonie G. Is treatment with a high flow nasal cannula effective in acute viral bronchiolitis? A physiologic study. Intensive Care Med. 2013 Jun;39(6):1088-94. doi: 10.1007/s00134-013-2879-y. Epub 2013 Mar 14. Erratum in: Intensive Care Med. 2013 Jun;39(6):1170. Combonie, Gilles [corrected to Cambonie, Gilles].
- Numa AH, Williams GD, Dakin CJ. The effect of nebulized epinephrine on respiratory mechanics and gas exchange in bronchiolitis. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2001 Jul 1;164(1):86-91.
- Ritchie JE, Williams AB, Gerard C, Hockey H. Evaluation of a humidified nasal high-flow oxygen system, using oxygraphy, capnography and measurement of upper airway pressures. Anaesth Intensive Care. 2011 Nov;39(6):1103-10.
- Rubin S, Ghuman A, Deakers T, Khemani R, Ross P, Newth CJ. Effort of breathing in children receiving high-flow nasal cannula. Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2014 Jan;15(1):1-6. doi: 10.1097/PCC.0000000000000011.
- Sanchez I, De Koster J, Powell RE, Wolstein R, Chernick V. Effect of racemic epinephrine and salbutamol on clinical score and pulmonary mechanics in infants with bronchiolitis. J Pediatr. 1993 Jan;122(1):145-51.
- Schibler A, Pham TM, Dunster KR, Foster K, Barlow A, Gibbons K, Hough JL. Reduced intubation rates for infants after introduction of high-flow nasal prong oxygen delivery. Intensive Care Med. 2011 May;37(5):847-52. doi: 10.1007/s00134-011-2177-5. Epub 2011 Mar 3.
- Stokes GM, Milner AD, Groggins RC. Work of breathing, intra-thoracic pressure and clinical findings in a group of babies with bronchiolitis. Acta Paediatr Scand. 1981 Sep;70(5):689-94.
- Wang EE, Law BJ, Stephens D. Pediatric Investigators Collaborative Network on Infections in Canada (PICNIC) prospective study of risk factors and outcomes in patients hospitalized with respiratory syncytial viral lower respiratory tract infection. J Pediatr. 1995 Feb;126(2):212-9.
- Willson DF, Horn SD, Hendley JO, Smout R, Gassaway J. Effect of practice variation on resource utilization in infants hospitalized for viral lower respiratory illness. Pediatrics. 2001 Oct;108(4):851-5.
- Wing R, James C, Maranda LS, Armsby CC. Use of high-flow nasal cannula support in the emergency department reduces the need for intubation in pediatric acute respiratory insufficiency. Pediatr Emerg Care. 2012 Nov;28(11):1117-23. doi: 10.1097/PEC.0b013e31827122a9.
- CHLA-14-00239
Study Results
Participant Flow
Recruitment Details | This study screened patients admitted to the PICU during the study period (September 2014 to June 2016) who were <3 years of age and started on high flow nasal cannula by the clinical team. |
---|---|
Pre-assignment Detail | Of the 54 patients who met eligibility criteria on screening, 39% (N=21) underwent high flow nasal cannula flow titrations and had effort of breathing measurements taken. |
Arm/Group Title | Fisher & Paykel (FP) HFNC | Vapotherm (VT) HFNC |
---|---|---|
Arm/Group Description | A subgroup of participants were placed exclusively on Fisher & Paykel (FP) high flow nasal cannula (HFNC) (N=9). The flow rate of the HFNC was adjusted to determine if there existed a change in their effort of breathing (EOB) at different conditions. Measurements of effort of breathing was obtained at flow rates of 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, and 2.0 L/kg/min. Adequate time was allowed at each flow rate for stabilization of EOB and flow levels were trialed in a random order, each for approximately 5 minutes. | A subgroup of patients (N=12) had flow titrations performed on both Fisher & Paykel (FP) and Vapotherm (VT) high flow nasal cannula (HFNC) delivery systems. The flow rate of the HFNC was adjusted to determine if there existed a change in their effort of breathing (EOB) at different conditions. These patients had flow titrations on both HFNC delivery systems performed to compare EOB on these two different HFNC delivery systems. With one exception, titrations were performed on FP first, then crossed over to VT. Measurements of effort of breathing was obtained at flow rates of 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, and 2.0 L/kg/min. Adequate time was allowed at each flow rate for stabilization of EOB and flow levels were trialed in a random order, each for approximately 5 minutes. |
Period Title: Overall Study | ||
STARTED | 9 | 12 |
COMPLETED | 9 | 12 |
NOT COMPLETED | 0 | 0 |
Baseline Characteristics
Arm/Group Title | Fisher & Paykel (FP) HFNC | Vapotherm (VT) HFNC | Total |
---|---|---|---|
Arm/Group Description | A subgroup was studied on Fisher & Paykel (FP) high flow nasal cannula (HFNC) exclusively (N=9). The flow rate of the HFNC was adjusted to determine if there existed a change in their effort of breathing (EOB) at different conditions. Measurements of effort of breathing was obtained at flow rates of 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, and 2.0 L/kg/min. Adequate time was allowed at each flow rate for stabilization of EOB and flow levels were trialed in a random order, each for approximately 5 minutes. | A subgroup was studied on Vapotherm (VT) high flow nasal cannula (HFNC) (N=12). These patients then crossed over to the other arm and had back-to-back titrations on both types of HFNC (FP and VT). The flow rate of the HFNC was adjusted to determine if there existed a change in their effort of breathing (EOB) at different conditions. Measurements of effort of breathing was obtained at flow rates of 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, and 2.0 L/kg/min. Adequate time was allowed at each flow rate for stabilization of EOB and flow levels were trialed in a random order, each for approximately 5 minutes. | Total of all reporting groups |
Overall Participants | 9 | 12 | 21 |
Age (months) [Median (Inter-Quartile Range) ] | |||
Median (Inter-Quartile Range) [months] |
15
|
4
|
6
|
Sex: Female, Male (Count of Participants) | |||
Female |
4
44.4%
|
5
41.7%
|
9
42.9%
|
Male |
5
55.6%
|
7
58.3%
|
12
57.1%
|
Race/Ethnicity, Customized (Count of Participants) | |||
African-American |
0
0%
|
2
16.7%
|
2
9.5%
|
Hispanic |
6
66.7%
|
9
75%
|
15
71.4%
|
Not specified |
3
33.3%
|
1
8.3%
|
4
19%
|
Weight (kilograms) [Median (Inter-Quartile Range) ] | |||
Median (Inter-Quartile Range) [kilograms] |
9
|
6.5
|
6.5
|
Respiratory Illness (participants) [Number] | |||
Bronchiolitis |
6
66.7%
|
7
58.3%
|
13
61.9%
|
Pneumonia |
2
22.2%
|
0
0%
|
2
9.5%
|
Other |
1
11.1%
|
5
41.7%
|
6
28.6%
|
Outcome Measures
Title | Percent Change in Pressure-rate Product (PRP) as a Function of Increasing HFNC Flow Rate on Both Types of HFNC Delivery System (FP and VT) |
---|---|
Description | PRP is a validated objective metric of effort of breathing which is derived from the product of the peak-to-trough change in esophageal pressure (in cmH20) and the respiratory rate (breaths per minute). The percent change in PRP is derived from the quotient of the absolute PRP at increased HFNC flow rates (1.0, 1.5, and 2.0 L/kg/min) divided by the absolute PRP at a baseline HFNC flow rate (0.5 L/kg/min). Percent change in PRP was used because a) there was a large degree of heterogeneity in baseline absolute PRP values in our study population based upon patient size, disease severity, and time point of illness, and b) we allowed for repeated measures on the same patient which would bias absolute PRP values in favor of those who were measured more frequently. It was not pre-specified to compare the two different HFNC delivery systems. |
Time Frame | median percent change in PRP over 5 minute measurement period |
Outcome Measure Data
Analysis Population Description |
---|
For this outcome measure, the arms/groups were combined to include all patients enrolled in the study. This included the patients studied on FP only (n=9) and those studied on VT and FP both (n=12) for a total n=21. |
Arm/Group Title | Percent Change in Pressure-Rate Product |
---|---|
Arm/Group Description | All participants in the study were placed on high flow nasal cannula (HFNC). For this outcome, the median percent change in PRP was obtained for all titrations on both types of HFNC delivery system (FP and VT). The flow rate of the HFNC was adjusted to determine if there existed a change in their effort of breathing (EOB) at different conditions. Measurements of effort of breathing was obtained at flow rates of 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, and 2.0 L/kg/min. Adequate time was allowed at each flow rate for stabilization of EOB and flow levels were trialed in a random order, each for approximately 5 minutes. |
Measure Participants | 21 |
Percent Change in PRP at 1.0 L/kg/min |
-10
|
Percent Change in PRP at 1.5 L/kg/min |
-20
|
Percent Change in PRP at 2.0 L/kg/min |
-23
|
Title | Pressure-rate Product (PRP) as a Function of Increasing HFNC Flow Rate on Both Types of HFNC Delivery System (FP and VT) |
---|---|
Description | PRP is a validated objective metric of effort of breathing which is derived from the product of the peak-to-trough change in esophageal pressure (in cmH20) and the respiratory rate (breaths per minute). These values were obtained from 5 minute flow titration periods. For this outcome, the PRP was obtained for all titrations on both types of HFNC delivery system (FP and VT). It was not pre-specified to compare the two different HFNC delivery systems. |
Time Frame | median PRP over a 5 minute period |
Outcome Measure Data
Analysis Population Description |
---|
For this outcome measure, the arms/groups were combined to include all patients enrolled in the study. This included the patients studied on FP only (n=9) and those studied on VT and FP both (n=12) for a total n=21. |
Arm/Group Title | Pressure-Rate Product |
---|---|
Arm/Group Description | All participants in the study were placed on high flow nasal cannula (HFNC). or this outcome, the PRP was obtained for all titrations on both types of HFNC delivery system (FP and VT).The flow rate of the HFNC was adjusted to determine if there existed a change in their effort of breathing (EOB) at different conditions. Measurements of effort of breathing was obtained at flow rates of 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, and 2.0 L/kg/min. Adequate time was allowed at each flow rate for stabilization of EOB and flow levels were trialed in a random order, each for approximately 5 minutes. |
Measure Participants | 21 |
PRP at 0.5 L/kg/min |
824
|
PRP at 1.0 L/kg/min |
699
|
PRP at 1.5 L/kg/min |
596
|
PRP at 2.0 L/kg/min |
594
|
Title | Phase Angle as a Function of Increasing HFNC Flow Rate on Both Types of HFNC Delivery System (FP and VT) |
---|---|
Description | Phase angle is a measure of asynchrony between thoracic and abdominal breathing compartments that has correlated with increased effort of breathing. It is derived by measuring the relative expansion of these two breathing compartments and describing the synchrony between them as an angle (theta). For this outcome, the phase angle was obtained for all titrations on both types of HFNC delivery system (FP and VT). It was not pre-specified to compare the two different HFNC delivery systems. |
Time Frame | median phase angle over a 5 minute period |
Outcome Measure Data
Analysis Population Description |
---|
For this outcome measure, the arms/groups were combined to include all patients enrolled in the study. This included the patients studied on FP only (n=9) and those studied on VT and FP both (n=12) for a total n=21. |
Arm/Group Title | Phase Angle |
---|---|
Arm/Group Description | The phase angle was measured at all flow titrations for all patients on both types of HFNC delivery systems (FP and VT). This is a measure of thoracoabdominal asynchrony and a proxy for effort of breathing. |
Measure Participants | 21 |
0.5 L/kg/min |
61
|
1.0 L/kg/min |
61
|
1.5 L/kg/min |
68
|
2.0 L/kg/min |
59
|
Title | Percent Change in Pressure-rate Product (PRP) From Baseline as a Function of Increasing HFNC Flow Rate, Comparing Different HFNC Delivery Systems |
---|---|
Description | For this outcome, a subgroup of patients (N=12) were examined who had PRP measurements obtained on two different HFNC delivery systems (Fisher & Paykel (FP) and Vapotherm (VT)) in back-to-back flow titration periods. With one exception, patients were first studied on the FP and then transitioned to the VT HFNC delivery system. |
Time Frame | median PRP over a 5 minute period |
Outcome Measure Data
Analysis Population Description |
---|
Percent change in PRP from baseline (of 0.5 L/kg/min) was measured at different flow rates (1.0, 1.5, and 2.0 L/kg/min) for patients who had flow titrations done on the two different HFNC delivery systems (Fisher & Paykel (FP) and Vapotherm (VT)). |
Arm/Group Title | Fisher & Paykel HFNC Delivery System | Vapotherm HFNC Delivery System |
---|---|---|
Arm/Group Description | This arm shows the outcome (the median of the percent change in PRP from baseline as a function of flow rate) for these patients when they were studied on the FP HFNC delivery system. | This arm shows the outcome (the median of the percent change in PRP from baseline as a function of flow rate) for these patients when they were studied on the VT HFNC delivery system. |
Measure Participants | 12 | 12 |
1.0 L/kg/min |
-15
|
-9
|
1.5 L/kg/min |
-19
|
-22
|
2.0 L/kg/min |
-23
|
-11
|
Title | Percent Change in Pressure-rate Product (PRP) From Baseline as a Function of Increasing HFNC Flow Rate, Comparing Weight-Stratified Subgroups on Both Types of HFNC Delivery System (FP and VT) |
---|---|
Description | To assess the relationship between patient size and dose-response of HFNC flow rate, we compared subgroups stratified by weight (patients <8 kg and >8 kg). For this outcome, the median percent change in PRP was obtained for all titrations on both types of HFNC delivery system (FP and VT). It was not pre-specified to compare the two different HFNC delivery systems. |
Time Frame | medain percent change in PRP over a 5 minute period |
Outcome Measure Data
Analysis Population Description |
---|
For this outcome measure, the arms/groups were combined to include all patients enrolled in the study. This included the patients studied on FP only (n=9) and those studied on VT and FP both (n=12) for a total n=21. |
Arm/Group Title | Less Than or Equal to 8 kg | Greater Than 8 kg |
---|---|---|
Arm/Group Description | The percent change in Pressure-rate Product (PRP) from baseline as a function of increasing HFNC flow rate was analyzed comparing weight-stratified subgroups. This analysis looked at the first titration performed on the HFNC delivery system for patients less than or equal to 8 kg (12 patients, 20 episodes) and greater than 8 kg (9 patients, 12 episodes). This outcome was derived from flow titraitons on both types of HFNC delivery system (FP and VT). | The percent change in Pressure-rate Product (PRP) from baseline as a function of increasing HFNC flow rate was analyzed comparing weight-stratified subgroups. This analysis looked at the first titration performed on the HFNC delivery system for patients less than or equal to 8 kg (12 patients, 20 episodes) and greater than 8 kg (9 patients, 12 episodes). This outcome was derived from flow titraitons on both types of HFNC delivery system (FP and VT). |
Measure Participants | 12 | 9 |
1.0 L/kg/min |
-14
|
-5
|
1.5 L/kg/min |
-27
|
-2
|
2.0 L/kg/min |
-25
|
-15
|
Title | Maximum Percent Change in Pressure-rate Product (PRP) From Baseline as a Function of Increasing HFNC Flow Rate, Comparing Weight-Stratified Subgroups on Both Types of HFNC Delivery System (FP and VT) |
---|---|
Description | Exploratory analysis of patients by further stratified weight groupings (<5 kg, 5-8 kg, and >8 kg) was performed to determine the greatest observed benefit of HFNC flow titration in patients of different sizes. For this outcome, the maximum percent change in PRP was obtained for all titrations on both types of HFNC delivery system (FP and VT). It was not pre-specified to compare the two different HFNC delivery systems. |
Time Frame | median of the maximum percent change in PRP over a 5 minute period |
Outcome Measure Data
Analysis Population Description |
---|
For this outcome measure, the arms/groups were combined to include all patients enrolled in the study. This included the patients studied on FP only (n=9) and those studied on VT and FP both (n=12) for a total n=21. |
Arm/Group Title | Maximum Percent Change in PRP From Baseline Stratified by Wt |
---|---|
Arm/Group Description | This analysis looked at the largest decrease in PRP for all flow titrations for weight stratified subgroups. For this outcome, the maximum percent change in PRP was obtained for all titrations on both types of HFNC delivery system (FP and VT). |
Measure Participants | 21 |
<5 kg |
-46
|
5-8 kg |
-30
|
>8 kg |
-17
|
Adverse Events
Time Frame | 22 months | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
Adverse Event Reporting Description | ||||
Arm/Group Title | Fisher & Paykel (FP) High Flow Nasal Cannula | Vapotherm (VT) High Flow Nasal Cannula | ||
Arm/Group Description | A subgroup was studied on Fisher & Paykel (FP) high flow nasal cannula (HFNC) exclusively (N=9). The flow rate of the HFNC was adjusted to determine if there existed a change in their effort of breathing (EOB) at different conditions. | A subgroup was studied on Vapotherm (VT) high flow nasal cannula (HFNC) (N=12). These patients then crossed over to the other arm and had back-to-back titrations on both types of HFNC (FP and VT). The flow rate of the HFNC was adjusted to determine if there existed a change in their effort of breathing (EOB) at different conditions. | ||
All Cause Mortality |
||||
Fisher & Paykel (FP) High Flow Nasal Cannula | Vapotherm (VT) High Flow Nasal Cannula | |||
Affected / at Risk (%) | # Events | Affected / at Risk (%) | # Events | |
Total | 0/21 (0%) | 0/12 (0%) | ||
Serious Adverse Events |
||||
Fisher & Paykel (FP) High Flow Nasal Cannula | Vapotherm (VT) High Flow Nasal Cannula | |||
Affected / at Risk (%) | # Events | Affected / at Risk (%) | # Events | |
Total | 0/21 (0%) | 0/12 (0%) | ||
Other (Not Including Serious) Adverse Events |
||||
Fisher & Paykel (FP) High Flow Nasal Cannula | Vapotherm (VT) High Flow Nasal Cannula | |||
Affected / at Risk (%) | # Events | Affected / at Risk (%) | # Events | |
Total | 0/21 (0%) | 0/12 (0%) | ||
Product Issues | ||||
any adverse event | 0/21 (0%) | 0 | 0/12 (0%) | 0 |
Limitations/Caveats
More Information
Certain Agreements
All Principal Investigators ARE employed by the organization sponsoring the study.
There is NOT an agreement between Principal Investigators and the Sponsor (or its agents) that restricts the PI's rights to discuss or publish trial results after the trial is completed.
Results Point of Contact
Name/Title | Thomas Weiler, MD |
---|---|
Organization | Presbyterian Hospital |
Phone | 505-724-7044 |
tweiler@gmail.com |
- CHLA-14-00239