Objective To explore the efficacy of humidified high flow nasal cannula ( HHFNC) for respiratory failure after ventilator weaning in post-operative newborns and infants with congenital heart disease. Methods FromJanuary 2010 to August 2010, 33 newborns and infants [ ( 7. 8 ±8. 4) months, range 3 days to 36 months; weight ( 6. 6 ±3. 6) kg, range 2. 2 to 19. 6 kg] were treated with HHFNC ( 22 cases) and routine oxygen therapy ( 11 cases) for respiratory failure following ventilator weaning after operation of congenital heart disease. Symptoms, blood oxygen saturation ( SpO2 ) , partial pressure of oxygen( PaO2 ) , partial pressure of carbondioxide ( PaCO2 ) , incidence rate of re-intubation, duration of ICU, and hospital stay were assessed and compared between the HHFNC group and the routine oxygen therapy group.Results There were no statistical significance in the duration of ICU, hospital stay, duration of mechanical ventilation, or infection rate between the HHFNC group and the routine oxygen therapy group ( P gt; 0. 05) . But the incidence rate of re-intubation was lower in the HHFNC group than that in the routine oxygen therapy group. Meanwhile SpO2 and PaO2 increased and PaCO2 decreased significantly in the HHFNC group ( P lt;0. 05) . Conclusion HHFNC shows a clinical improvement rapidly and efficiently in preventing respiratory failure after ventilator weaning in post-operative newborns and infants with congenital heart disease.
ObjectiveTo systematically review the clinical effects of non-humidified versus humidified low-to-moderate flow oxygen inhalation therapy via nasal cannula. MethodsRandomized controlled trials (RCTs), clinical controlled trials (CCTs) and cross-over studies about the clinical effects of non-humidified versus humidified low-to-moderate flow nasal cannula oxygen inhalation therapy in hospitalized adult patients were searched in The Cochrane Library (Issue 3, 2016), The Joanna Briggs Institute Evidence Based Practice (EBP) Database, EMbase, PubMed, Web of Science, CBM, CNKI, VIP and WanFang Data from inception to March 2016. Three reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. Then meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.3 software. ResultsA total of nine RCTs and three CCTs involving 3 756 patients were finally included. The results of meta-analysis indicated that: non-humidified was superior to humidified oxygen therapy in reducing bacterial contamination of oxygen apparatus (P < 0.05) and the time of daily replacement of sterile water oxygen humidifier bottles (P < 0.05), while the two groups were alike in relieving nasal dryness (RR=1.08, 95%CI 0.91 to 1.29, P=0.37), nasal bleeding (RR=1.17, 95%CI 0.66 to 2.08, P=0.59) and discomfort (RR=0.80, 95%CI 0.56 to 1.14, P=0.22). ConclusionCurrent evidence indicates that there is no significant difference between non-humidified and humidified low-to-moderate flow nasal cannula oxygen inhalation therapy in relieving patients' nasal dryness, nasal bleeding and discomfort. But non-humidified oxygen therapy can reduce bacterial contamination of oxygen apparatus, simplify the operation procedures and lessen nurses' operation time.
Objectives To explore the efficacy of humidified and heated high flow oxygen therapy for the critically ill patients in intensive care unit (ICU) after extubation. Methods From January 2014 to December 2016, 487 patients were enrolled. Patients were allocated to two treatment groups randomly, which were humidified and heated high flow oxygen therapy group (236 patients, HFM group, aged 55.3±21.1 years old) and routine oxygen therapy group (251 patients, TO group, aged 58.4±19.3 years old). Blood oxygen saturation, arterial partial pressure of oxygen (PaO2), arterial partial pressure of carbon dioxide (PaCO2), fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2), respiratory frequency, incidence rate of reintubation, ventilator-free days, ICU length of stay, and hospital stay were assessed and compared between the HFM group and the TO group. Results The hospital stay was similar in two groups. There were more ventilator-free days in the HFM group (P<0.05), fewer patients required reintubation (4.2%vs. 10.4%, P<0.05) and less ICU length of stay [(10.5±6.1) dvs. (14.3±8.5) d, P<0.05]. PaO2/FiO2 of the HFM group were better than the TO group after extubation at 2 h, 4 h, 8 h, 24 h, and 48 h (P<0.05). There were no statistically significant differences in respiratory frequency and PaCO2. Conclusions Humidified and heated high flow oxygen therapy can supply a better oxygenation for patients after extubation in ICU. It could be a common therapy in ICU for the critically patients after extubation.