Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Original Article
  • Published:

Comparing two methods of delivering high-flow gas therapy by nasal cannula following endotracheal extubation: a prospective, randomized, masked, crossover trial

Journal of Perinatology volume 26, pages 481–485 (2006)Cite this article

Abstract

Objective:

We compared two methods of delivering high-flow gas therapy by nasal cannula, applied immediately after planned endotracheal extubations of NICU patients.

Study design and methods:

Thirty NICU patients who were about to be extubated from mechanical ventilation were randomized into two groups; Group 1 received Vapotherm® for the first 24 h after extubation, then standard high-flow nasal cannula for the next 24 h, and Group 2 received standard high-flow therapy for the first 24 h, then Vapotherm® for the next 24 h. At 24 h after extubation and again 48 h after extubation, a neonatologist who was not aware which modality the patient had been receiving examined the nasal mucosa and applied a scoring system. A research nurse who was unaware of the modality abstracted respiratory rates and respiratory effort scores from a specific study-bedside record. The experimental design was such that a patient could ‘fail’ extubation either by reintubation for mechanical ventilation, or by rescue to the opposite modality before completing the 24-h test period.

Results:

Fifteen patients were randomized to Group 1 and 15 to Group 2. No differences were apparent between the groups in birth weight, gestational age, age at study entry, gender or underlying pulmonary disorder. Respiratory rates were similar while on Vapotherm® (52±13 breaths/min, mean±s.d.) and high-flow (54±14/min). At 24 h after starting the modality, those on Vapotherm® had more normal examinations of the nasal mucosa (2.7±1.2 vs 7.8±1.7, P<0.0005) and lower respiratory effort scores (1.2±0.6 vs 2.0±0.9, P<0.05) than did those on high-flow. No patients failed while on Vapotherm®, but seven failed while on high-flow (two reintubations and five rescue switches to Vapotherm®, P<0.005).

Conclusions:

Among NICU patients immediately following extubation, Vapotherm® performed better than a standard high-flow nasal cannula in maintaining a normal appearing nasal mucosa, a lower respiratory effort score, and averting reintubation.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Sreenan C, Lemke RP, Hudson-Mason A, Osiovich H . High-flow nasal cannulae in the management of apnea of prematurity: a comparison with conventional nasal continuous positive airway pressure. Pediatrics 2001; 107: 1081–1083.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Myers TR . AARC clinical practice guideline. Selection of an oxygen delivery devise for neonatal and pediatric patients. Respir Care 2002; 47: 707–716.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Kopelman A, Holbert D . Use of oxygen cannulas in extremely low birth weight infants is associated with mucosal trauma and bleeding, and possibly with coagulase-negative staphylococcal sepsis. J Perinatol 2003; 23: 69–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. www.vtherm.com.

  5. In-house literature. Vapotherm 2004. Inc. 198 Log Canoe Circle: Stevensville, MD.

  6. Waugh JB, Granger WM . An evaluation of 2 new devices for nasal high-flow gas therapy. Respir Care 2004; 49: 902–906.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. A Collective Task Force Facilitated by the American College of Chest Physicians, the American Association for Respiratory Care, and the American College of Critical Care Medicine. Evidence-based guidelines for weaning and discontinuing ventilatory support. Respir Care 2002; 47: 69–90.

  8. Durbin Jr CG, Campbell RS, Bransone RD . AARC clinical practice guideline. Removal of the endotracheal tube. Respir Care 1999; 44: 85–90.

    Google Scholar 

  9. deKlerk A . Humidified high flow nasal cannulae. Hot Topics Neonatol 2005; 4–6: 138–158.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Ralstonia associated with Vapotherm oxygen delivery device – United States, 2005. Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2005; 54: 1052–1053.

  11. Locke RG, Wolfson MR, Shaffer TH, Rubinstein SD, Greenspan JS . Inadvertent administration of positive-end-distending pressure during nasal cannula flow. Pediatrics 1993; 91: 135–138.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Finer NN . Nasal cannula use in the preterm infant: oxygen or pressure? Pediatrics 2005; 116: 1216–1217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors thank the nurses and respiratory therapists at the McKay-Dee Hospital NICU for their valuable assistance with the study. We also thank Gorgi Rigby, RRT, LDS Hospital NICU, Salt Lake City, UT for helpful discussions about the research project.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Intermountain Healthcare, McKay-Dee Hospital, Ogden, UT, USA

    D D Woodhead, D K Lambert, J M Clark & R D Christensen

Authors
  1. D D Woodhead
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. D K Lambert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. J M Clark
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. R D Christensen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to R D Christensen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Woodhead, D., Lambert, D., Clark, J. et al. Comparing two methods of delivering high-flow gas therapy by nasal cannula following endotracheal extubation: a prospective, randomized, masked, crossover trial. J Perinatol 26, 481–485 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.jp.7211543

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.jp.7211543

Keywords

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links