Download PDF
J Pediatr Intensive Care 2023; 12(03): 167-172
DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1730933
Original Article

Extubation to High-Flow Nasal Cannula in Infants Following Cardiac Surgery: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Hannah Stevens
1   Faculty of Medicine, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Canada
,
Julien Gallant
2   Department of Pediatric Critical Care, IWK Health, Halifax, Canada
,
Jennifer Foster
1   Faculty of Medicine, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Canada
2   Department of Pediatric Critical Care, IWK Health, Halifax, Canada
3   Department of Critical Care, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Canada
,
David Horne
1   Faculty of Medicine, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Canada
4   Division of Pediatric Congenital Cardiac Surgery, IWK Health, Halifax, Canada
5   Department of Surgery, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Canada
,
Kristina Krmpotic 
1   Faculty of Medicine, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Canada
2   Department of Pediatric Critical Care, IWK Health, Halifax, Canada
3   Department of Critical Care, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Canada
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) therapy is commonly used in the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) for postextubation respiratory support. This hypothesis-generating retrospective cohort study aimed to compare postextubation PICU length of stay in infants extubated to HFNC and low flow oxygen (LF) in PICU following cardiac surgery. Of 136 infants (newborn to 1 year) who were intubated and mechanically ventilated in PICU following cardiac surgery, 72 (53%) were extubated to HFNC and 64 (47%) to LF. Compared with patients extubated to LF, those extubated to HFNC had significantly longer durations of cardiopulmonary bypass (152 vs. 109 minutes; p = 0.002), aortic cross-clamp (90 vs. 63 minutes; p = 0.003), and invasive mechanical ventilation (3.2 vs. 1.6 days; p < 0.001), although demographic and preoperative clinical variables were similar. No significant difference was observed in postextubation PICU length of stay between HFNC and LF groups in unadjusted analysis (3.3 vs. 2.6 days, respectively; p = 0.19) and after controlling for potential confounding variables (F [1,125] = 0.17, p = 0.68, R2  = 0.16). Escalation of therapy was similar between HFNC and LF groups (8.3 vs. 14.1%; p = 0.41). HFNC was effective as rescue therapy for six patients in the LF group requiring escalation of therapy. Need for reintubation was similar between HFNC and LF groups (8.3 vs. 4.7%; p = 0.5). Although extubation to HFNC was associated with a trend toward longer postextubation PICU length of stay and was successfully used as rescue therapy for several infants extubated to LF, our results must be interpreted with caution given the limitations of our study.

Keywords

extubation - high-flow nasal cannula - mechanical ventilation - noninvasive ventilation - pediatric cardiac surgery - pediatric intensive care unit


Publication History

Received: 14 December 2020

Accepted: 21 April 2021

Article published online:
19 June 2021

© 2021. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

 

  • References

  • 1 Morris JV, Kapetanstrataki M, Parslow RC, Davis PJ, Ramnarayan P. Patterns of use of heated humidified high-flow nasal cannula therapy in PICUs in the United Kingdom and Republic or Ireland. Pediatr Crit Care Med 2019; 20 (03) 223-232
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Baudin F, Gagnon S, Crulli B, Proulx F, Jouvet P, Emeriaud G. Modalities and complications associated with the use of high-flow nasal cannula: experience in a pediatric ICU. Respir Care 2016; 61 (10) 1305-1310
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Coletti KD, Bagdure DN, Walker LK, Remy KE, Custer JW. High-flow nasal cannula utilization in pediatric critical care. Respir Care 2017; 62 (08) 1023-1029
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Romans RA, Schwartz SM, Costello JM. et al. Epidemiology of noninvasive ventilation in pediatric cardiac ICUs. Pediatr Crit Care Med 2017; 18 (10) 949-957
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Kawaguchi A, Yasui Y, deCaen A, Garros D. The clinical impact of heated humidified high-flow nasal cannula on pediatric respiratory distress. Pediatr Crit Care Med 2017; 18 (02) 112-119
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Mikalsen IB, Davis P, Øymar K. High flow nasal cannula in children: a literature review. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med 2016; 24: 93
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Lin J, Zhang Y, Xiong L, Liu S, Gong C, Dai J. High-flow nasal cannula therapy for children with bronchiolitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Arch Dis Child 2019; 104 (06) 564-576
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Moreel L, Proesmans M. High flow nasal cannula as respiratory support in treating infant bronchiolitis: a systematic review. Eur J Pediatr 2020; 179 (05) 711-718
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Mayfield S, Jauncey-Cooke J, Hough JL, Schibler A, Gibbons K, Bogossian F. High-flow nasal cannula therapy for respiratory support in children. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2014; 2014 (03) CD009850
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Akyıldız B, Öztürk S, Ülgen-Tekerek N, Doğanay S, Görkem SB. Comparison between high-flow nasal oxygen cannula and conventional oxygen therapy after extubation in pediatric intensive care unit. Turk J Pediatr 2018; 60 (02) 126-133
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Tominaga Y, Iwai S, Yamauchi S. et al. Post-extubation inhaled nitric oxide therapy via high-flow nasal cannula after fontan procedure. Pediatr Cardiol 2019; 40 (05) 1064-1071
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Testa G, Iodice F, Ricci Z. et al. Comparative evaluation of high-flow nasal cannula and conventional oxygen therapy in paediatric cardiac surgical patients: a randomized controlled trial. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg 2014; 19 (03) 456-461
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Burra V, Lakshmi AS, Bhat A, Prabhakar V, Manjunatha N. Comparison of high-flow nasal cannula versus conventional oxygen therapy following extubation after paediatric cardiac surgery. Airway 2019; 2: 4-9
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Harrison AM, Cox AC, Davis S, Piedmonte M, Drummond-Webb JJ, Mee RB. Failed extubation after cardiac surgery in young children: Prevalence, pathogenesis, and risk factors. Pediatr Crit Care Med 2002; 3 (02) 148-152
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Green J, Walters III HL, Delius RE, Sarnaik A, Mastropietro CW. Prevalence and risk factors for upper airway obstruction after pediatric cardiac surgery. J Pediatr 2015; 166 (02) 332-337
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 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; 15 (01) 1-6
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Weiler T, Kamerkar A, Hotz J, Ross PA, Newth CJL, Khemani RG. The relationship between high flow nasal cannula flow rate and effort of breathing in children. J Pediatr 2017; 189: 66-71.e3
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Parke RL, Bloch A, McGuinness SP. Effect of very-high-flow nasal therapy on airway pressure and end-expiratory lung impedance in healthy volunteers. Respir Care 2015; 60 (10) 1397-1403
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Nielsen KR, Ellington LE, Gray AJ, Stanberry LI, Smith LS, DiBlasi RM. Effect of high-flow nasal cannula on expiratory pressure and ventilation in infant, pediatric, and adult models. Respir Care 2018; 63 (02) 147-157
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Ejiofor BD, Carroll RW, Bortcosh W, Kacmarek RM. PEEP generated by high-flow nasal cannula in a pediatric model. Respir Care 2019; 64 (10) 1240-1249
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Bronicki RA, Penny DJ, Anas NG, Fuhrman B. Cardiopulmonary Interactions. Pediatr Crit Care Med 2016; 17 (08, Suppl 1): S182-S193
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Shioji N, Iwasaki T, Kanazawa T. et al. Physiological impact of high-flow nasal cannula therapy on postextubation acute respiratory failure after pediatric cardiac surgery: a prospective observational study. J Intensive Care 2017; 5: 35
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Itagaki T, Nakanishi N, Okuda N. et al. Effect of high-flow nasal cannula on thoraco-abdominal synchrony in pediatric subjects after cardiac surgery. Respir Care 2019; 64 (01) 10-16
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Pham TM, O'Malley L, Mayfield S, Martin S, Schibler A. The effect of high flow nasal cannula therapy on the work of breathing in infants with bronchiolitis. Pediatr Pulmonol 2015; 50 (07) 713-720
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Gaies MG, Gurney JG, Yen AH. et al. Vasoactive-inotropic score as a predictor of morbidity and mortality in infants after cardiopulmonary bypass. Pediatr Crit Care Med 2010; 11 (02) 234-238
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 O'Brien SM, Clarke DR, Jacobs JP. et al. An empirically based tool for analyzing mortality associated with congenital heart surgery. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2009; 138 (05) 1139-1153
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Shein SL, Slain KN, Rotta AT. High flow nasal cannula flow rates: new data worth the weight. J Pediatr 2017; 189: 9-10
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Brown KL, Ridout DA, Goldman AP, Hoskote A, Penny DJ. Risk factors for long intensive care unit stay after cardiopulmonary bypass in children. Crit Care Med 2003; 31 (01) 28-33
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Pagowska-Klimek I, Pychynska-Pokorska M, Krajewski W, Moll JJ. Predictors of long intensive care unit stay following cardiac surgery in children. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2011; 40 (01) 179-184
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Apostolakis E, Filos KS, Koletsis E, Dougenis D. Lung dysfunction following cardiopulmonary bypass. J Card Surg 2010; 25 (01) 47-55
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Li S, Krawczeski CD, Zappitelli M. et al; TRIBE-AKI Consortium. Incidence, risk factors, and outcomes of acute kidney injury after pediatric cardiac surgery: a prospective multi-center study. Crit Care Med 2011; 39 (06) 1493-1499
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Du X, Chen H, Song X. et al. Risk factors for low cardiac output syndrome in children with congenital heart disease undergoing cardiac surgery: a retrospective cohort study. BMC Pediatr 2020; 20 (01) 87
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Boehne M, Sasse M, Karch A. et al. Systemic inflammatory response syndrome after pediatric congenital heart surgery: incidence, risk factors, and clinical outcome. J Card Surg 2017; 32 (02) 116-125
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Tabib A, Abrishami SE, Mahdavi M, Mortezaeian H, Totonchi Z. Predictors of prolonged mechanical ventilation in pediatric patients after cardiac surgery for congenital heart disease. Res Cardiovasc Med 2016; 5 (03) e30391
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Shioji N, Kanazawa T, Iwasaki T. et al. High-flow nasal cannula versus noninvasive ventilation for postextubation acute respiratory failure after pediatric cardiac surgery. Acta Med Okayama 2019; 73 (01) 15-20
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Gupta P, Kuperstock JE, Hashmi S. et al. Efficacy and predictors of success of noninvasive ventilation for prevention of extubation failure in critically ill children with heart disease. Pediatr Cardiol 2013; 34 (04) 964-977
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Gupta P, Rettiganti M, Gossett JM. et al. Risk factors for mechanical ventilation and reintubation after pediatric heart surgery. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2016; 151 (02) 451-8.e3
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Gaies M, Tabbutt S, Schwartz SM. et al. Clinical epidemiology of extubation failure in the pediatric cardiac ICU: a report from the pediatric cardiac critical care consortium. Pediatr Crit Care Med 2015; 16 (09) 837-845
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Laudato N, Gupta P, Walters III HL, Delius RE, Mastropietro CW. Risk factors for extubation failure following neonatal cardiac surgery. Pediatr Crit Care Med 2015; 16 (09) 859-867
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Gc VS, Franklin D, Whitty JA. et al. First-line oxygen therapy with high-flow in bronchiolitis is not cost saving for the health service. Arch Dis Child 2020; 105 (10) 975-980
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar