Dataset Information

Nasotracheal vs. Orotracheal Intubation and Post-extubation Airway Obstruction in Critically Ill Children: An Open-Label Randomized Controlled Trial.

ABSTRACT: Background: The data on long-term nasotracheal intubation among mechanically ventilated critically ill children is limited. The purpose of this study was to compare the rate of post-extubation airway obstruction (PEAO) with nasotracheal and orotracheal intubation. Methods: This open-label randomized controlled trial was conducted in PICU of a tertiary care and teaching hospital in North India from January-December 2020 involving intubated children aged 3 months-12 years. After written informed consent, children were randomized into nasotracheal and orotracheal intubation groups. Post-extubation, modified Westley's croup score (mWCS) was used at 10-timepoints (0-min, 30 min, 1, 2, 3, 6, 12, 24, 36, and 48-h after extubation) to monitor for PEAO. The primary outcome was the rate of PEAO; and secondary outcomes were time taken for intubation, number of intubation attempts, complications during intubation, unplanned extubation, repeated intubations, tube malposition/displacement, endotracheal tube blockade, ventilator associated pneumonia, skin trauma, extubation failure/re-intubation, duration of PICU stay, and mortality. Results: Seventy children were randomized into nasotracheal (n = 30) and orotracheal (n = 40) groups. Both the groups were similar in baseline characteristics. The rate of PEAO was similar between nasotracheal and orotracheal groups (10 vs. 20%, p = 0.14). The maximum mWCS and mWCS at 10-timepoints were similar in two groups. The time taken for intubation was significantly longer (85 vs. 48 s, p < 0.001) in nasotracheal group, whereas other secondary outcomes were similar in two groups. Conclusion: The rate of PEAO was not different between nasotracheal and orotracheal groups. Clinical Trial Registration:http://ctri.nic.in, Identifier: CTRI/2020/01/022988.

SUBMITTER: Kumar V

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8481700 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPost-extubation dysphagia (PED) emerges as a frequent complication following endotracheal intubation within the intensive care unit (ICU). PED has been strongly linked to adverse outcomes, including aspiration, pneumonia, malnutrition, heightened mortality rates, and prolonged hospitalization, resulting in escalated healthcare expenditures. Nevertheless, the reported incidence of PED varies substantially across the existing body of literature. Therefore, the principal objective of this review was to provide a comprehensive estimate of PED incidence in ICU patients undergoing orotracheal intubation.MethodsWe searched Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang Database, China Science, Technology Journal Database (VIP), and SinoMed databases from inception to August 2023. Two reviewers independently screened studies and extracted data. Subsequently, a random-effects model was employed for meta-statistical analysis utilizing the "meta prop" command within Stata SE version 15.0 to ascertain the incidence of PED. In addition, we performed subgroup analyses and meta-regression to elucidate potential sources of heterogeneity among the included studies.ResultsOf 4144 studies, 30 studies were included in this review. The overall pooled incidence of PED was 36% (95% confidence interval [CI] 29-44%). Subgroup analyses unveiled that the pooled incidence of PED, stratified by assessment time (≤ 3 h, 4-6 h, ≤ 24 h, and ≤ 48 h), was as follows: 31.0% (95% CI 8.0-59.0%), 28% (95% CI 22.0-35.0%), 41% (95% CI 33.0-49.0%), and 49.0% (95% CI 34.0-63.0%), respectively. When sample size was 100 < N ≤ 300, the PED incidence was more close to the overall PED incidence. Meta-regression analysis highlighted that sample size, assessment time and mean intubation time constituted the source of heterogeneity among the included studies.ConclusionThe incidence of PED was high among ICU patients who underwent orotracheal intubation. ICU professionals should raise awareness about PED. In the meantime, it is important to develop guidelines or consensus on the most appropriate PED assessment time and assessment tools to accurately assess the incidence of PED.

Project description:ImportanceThe optimal first-line mode of noninvasive respiratory support following extubation of critically ill children is not known.ObjectiveTo evaluate the noninferiority of high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) therapy as the first-line mode of noninvasive respiratory support following extubation, compared with continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP), on time to liberation from respiratory support.Design, setting, and participantsThis was a pragmatic, multicenter, randomized, noninferiority trial conducted at 22 pediatric intensive care units in the United Kingdom. Six hundred children aged 0 to 15 years clinically assessed to require noninvasive respiratory support within 72 hours of extubation were recruited between August 8, 2019, and May 18, 2020, with last follow-up completed on November 22, 2020.InterventionsPatients were randomized 1:1 to start either HFNC at a flow rate based on patient weight (n = 299) or CPAP of 7 to 8 cm H2O (n = 301).Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was time from randomization to liberation from respiratory support, defined as the start of a 48-hour period during which the child was free from all forms of respiratory support (invasive or noninvasive), assessed against a noninferiority margin of an adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of 0.75. There were 6 secondary outcomes, including mortality at day 180 and reintubation within 48 hours.ResultsOf the 600 children who were randomized, 553 children (HFNC, 281; CPAP, 272) were included in the primary analysis (median age, 3 months; 241 girls [44%]). HFNC failed to meet noninferiority, with a median time to liberation of 50.5 hours (95% CI, 43.0-67.9) vs 42.9 hours (95% CI, 30.5-48.2) for CPAP (adjusted HR, 0.83; 1-sided 97.5% CI, 0.70-∞). Similar results were seen across prespecified subgroups. Of the 6 prespecified secondary outcomes, 5 showed no significant difference, including the rate of reintubation within 48 hours (13.3% for HFNC vs 11.5 % for CPAP). Mortality at day 180 was significantly higher for HFNC (5.6% vs 2.4% for CPAP; adjusted odds ratio, 3.07 [95% CI, 1.1-8.8]). The most common adverse events were abdominal distension (HFNC: 8/281 [2.8%] vs CPAP: 7/272 [2.6%]) and nasal/facial trauma (HFNC: 14/281 [5.0%] vs CPAP: 15/272 [5.5%]).Conclusions and relevanceAmong critically ill children requiring noninvasive respiratory support following extubation, HFNC compared with CPAP following extubation failed to meet the criterion for noninferiority for time to liberation from respiratory support.Trial registrationisrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN60048867.

Project description:ImportanceTracheal intubation is one of the most commonly performed and high-risk interventions in critically ill patients. Limited information is available on adverse peri-intubation events.ObjectiveTo evaluate the incidence and nature of adverse peri-intubation events and to assess current practice of intubation in critically ill patients.Design, setting, and participantsThe International Observational Study to Understand the Impact and Best Practices of Airway Management in Critically Ill Patients (INTUBE) study was an international, multicenter, prospective cohort study involving consecutive critically ill patients undergoing tracheal intubation in the intensive care units (ICUs), emergency departments, and wards, from October 1, 2018, to July 31, 2019 (August 28, 2019, was the final follow-up) in a convenience sample of 197 sites from 29 countries across 5 continents.ExposuresTracheal intubation.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was the incidence of major adverse peri-intubation events defined as at least 1 of the following events occurring within 30 minutes from the start of the intubation procedure: cardiovascular instability (either: systolic pressure <65 mm Hg at least once, <90 mm Hg for >30 minutes, new or increase need of vasopressors or fluid bolus >15 mL/kg), severe hypoxemia (peripheral oxygen saturation <80%) or cardiac arrest. The secondary outcomes included intensive care unit mortality.ResultsOf 3659 patients screened, 2964 (median age, 63 years; interquartile range [IQR], 49-74 years; 62.6% men) from 197 sites across 5 continents were included. The main reason for intubation was respiratory failure in 52.3% of patients, followed by neurological impairment in 30.5%, and cardiovascular instability in 9.4%. Primary outcome data were available for all patients. Among the study patients, 45.2% experienced at least 1 major adverse peri-intubation event. The predominant event was cardiovascular instability, observed in 42.6% of all patients undergoing emergency intubation, followed by severe hypoxemia (9.3%) and cardiac arrest (3.1%). Overall ICU mortality was 32.8%.Conclusions and relevanceIn this observational study of intubation practices in critically ill patients from a convenience sample of 197 sites across 29 countries, major adverse peri-intubation events-in particular cardiovascular instability-were observed frequently.

Dataset Information

Nasotracheal vs. Orotracheal Intubation and Post-extubation Airway Obstruction in Critically Ill Children: An Open-Label Randomized Controlled Trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets