Humidified versus nonhumidified low-flow oxygen therapy in children with Pierre-Robin syndrome: A randomized controlled trial

• Published in: Medicine (Baltimore) Vol. 101; no. 38; p. e30329
• Main Authors: Zhang, Xin, Fan, Aijuan, Liu, Yingfei, Wei, Li
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Hagerstown, MD Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 23.09.2022
• Subjects: Clinical Trial/Experimental Study
• ISSN: 1536-5964; 0025-7974; 1536-5964
• DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000030329

Background: Humidification is an important process in clinical oxygen therapy. We aimed to evaluate the effects and safety of humidified versus nonhumidified low-flow oxygen therapy in children with Pierre-Robin syndrome. Methods: This study was an open-label, single-centered randomized controlled trial (RCT) with a parallel group design. The study protocol has been registered in Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR1900021584). The children were randomized to the humidified versus nonhumidified groups. Average arterial oxygen partial pressure (PaO 2 ) and carbon dioxide partial pressure (PaCO 2 ), incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP), nasal cavity dryness, nasal mucosal bleeding and bacterial contamination of the humidified bottle, the cost of nasal oxygen therapy and duration of intensive care unit (ICU) stay were analyzed. Results: A total of 213 children with Pierre-Robin syndrome were included. There were no significant differences in the gender, age, weight, prematurity, duration of anesthesia and surgery duration of mandibular traction between humidified group and nonhumidified group (all P > .05). No significant differences in the average arterial PaO 2 and PaCO 2 level on the postoperative day 1, 2, and ICU discharge between humidified group and nonhumidified group were found (all P > .05). There were no significant differences in the incidence of nasal cavity dryness, nasal mucosal bleeding, bacterial contamination and VAP, the duration of ICU stay between humidified group and nonhumidified group (all P > .05). The cost of nasal oxygen therapy in the humidified group was significantly less than that of nonhumidified group ( P = .013). Conclusions: Humidifying the oxygen with cold sterile water in the low-flow oxygen therapy in children may be not necessary. Future RCTs with lager sample size and rigorous design are warranted to further elucidate the effects and safety of humidified versus nonhumidified low-flow oxygen therapy.