Comparison of high flow nasal cannula and non-invasive positive pressure ventilation in children with bronchiolitis: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Abstract

BackgroundThe effects of high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) compared to non-invasive positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) on children with bronchiolitis remain unclear.MethodsThis meta-analysis was performed following the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis (PRISMA) statement. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were identified from a comprehensive search in PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science without time and language limitations. Primary endpoints include the rate of treatment failure, the rate of need for intubation, and the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) length of stay.ResultsFive RCTs including 541 children of less than 24 months were enrolled in the meta-analysis. Compared to the NIPPV group, the rate of treatment failure was significantly higher in the HFNC treatment group (I2 = 0.0%, P = 0.574; RR 1.523, 95% CI 1.205 to 1.924, P < 0.001). No significant difference was noted in the need for intubation (I2 = 0.0%, P = 0.431; RR 0.874, 95% CI 0.598 to 1.276, P = 0.485) and the PICU length of stay (I2 = 0.0%, P = 0.568; WMD = –0.097, 95% CI = –0.480 to 0.285, P = 0.618) between the HFNC group and the NIPPV treatment.ConclusionCompared to the NIPPV group, HFNC therapy was associated with a significantly higher treatment failure rate in children suffering from bronchiolitis. The intubation rate and the PICU length of stay were comparable between the two approaches.