A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

High-flow nasal cannula vs standard respiratory care in pediatric procedural sedation: A randomized controlled pilot trial. | LitMetric

High-flow nasal cannula vs standard respiratory care in pediatric procedural sedation: A randomized controlled pilot trial.

Pediatr Pulmonol

Division of Neonatology and Pediatric Intensive Care Medicine, Center for Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, Medical Center, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.

Published: October 2020

Introduction: Respiratory instability is frequently observed during pediatric procedural sedation. The aim of this trial was to estimate the impact of high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) therapy on respiratory stability during sedation for upper gastrointestinal tract endoscopy in children.

Methods: Prospective randomized controlled non-blinded single-center pilot trial. Children were randomly allocated to receive either HFNC (2 L/kg/min) or low-flow nasal oxygen cannula (LFNC, standard care). FiO was titrated to maintain SpO 94% to 98% in both groups. Primary outcome was the number of events of respiratory instability defined by prespecified criteria (hypoxia, hypercapnia, apnea). Secondary outcomes included type and duration of events, number of interventions to regain respiratory stability and cumulative doses of medication.

Results: Fifty children (mean age, 12.3 ± 3.1 years) were enrolled and treated with HFNC (n = 25) or LFNC (n = 25). Patient and intervention characteristics were not different in the two study groups, including total oxygen flow rate. Mean (SD) number of respiratory events in the HFNC group was 2.0 ± 1.9 events compared to 2.0 ± 1.4 events in the LFNC group (P = .65; 95% CI of difference, -1.0 to 1.0). There was no difference for any secondary outcome criteria, percentage of patients for any outcome criteria and no difference in the number of respiratory events or airway management maneuvers per patient between treatment groups.

Conclusions: HFNC did not increase respiratory stability in sedated children undergoing upper gastrointestinal tract endoscopy compared to LFNC.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ppul.24975DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

respiratory stability
12
high-flow nasal
8
nasal cannula
8
respiratory
8
pediatric procedural
8
procedural sedation
8
randomized controlled
8
pilot trial
8
respiratory instability
8
upper gastrointestinal
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!