Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2013 Jul;49(7):554-6.
doi: 10.1111/jpc.12277. Epub 2013 Jun 18.

Comparison of the pharyngeal pressure provided by two heated, humidified high-flow nasal cannulae devices in premature infants

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Comparison of the pharyngeal pressure provided by two heated, humidified high-flow nasal cannulae devices in premature infants

Clare L Collins et al. J Paediatr Child Health. 2013 Jul.

Abstract

Aims: This study aims to determine if there is a difference in the pharyngeal pressure, measured as a surrogate for continuous positive distending airway pressure, delivered to premature infants between two commonly used heated, humidified high-flow nasal cannulae (HHHFNC) devices: Fisher & Paykel Healthcare HHHFNC and Vapotherm 2000i.

Methods: Pharyngeal pressure measurements were taken from stable premature infants receiving HHHFNC for respiratory support. Flow rates of 2-8 L/min were studied.

Results: Nine infants had pharyngeal pressure measurements recorded with both HHHFNC devices at flow rates of 2-8 L/min. There was no difference in pharyngeal pressures recorded between devices at flow rates of 2-6 L/min; measured pressure was linearly associated with flow (R(2) = 0.9). At flow rates of 7 L/min, Vapotherm delivered a mean (standard deviation) pharyngeal pressure of 4.7 (2.2) cmH2 O compared with 4.23 (2.2) cmH2 O by the Fisher & Paykel device (P = 0.04). At a flow of 8 L/min, the mean pharyngeal pressure via Vapotherm was 4.9 (2.2) cmH2 O compared with 4.1 (2.3) cmH2 O with the Fisher & Paykel device (P = 0.05).

Conclusions: Both HHHFNC delivered similar pharyngeal pressures at flow rates of 2-6 L/min. The pressure limiter valve of the Fisher & Paykel device attenuated the pharyngeal pressures at flows of 7 and 8 L/min. Vapotherm trended towards higher delivered pharyngeal pressure at flow rates 7 and 8 L/min, but the clinical significance of the difference remains unclear.

Keywords: continuous positive airway pressure; heated; humidified high-flow nasal cannula; infant; non-invasive ventilation; premature.

PubMed Disclaimer

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources