2017
DOI: 10.1007/s00134-016-4617-8
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

High flow nasal cannula (HFNC) versus nasal continuous positive airway pressure (nCPAP) for the initial respiratory management of acute viral bronchiolitis in young infants: a multicenter randomized controlled trial (TRAMONTANE study)

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

9
217
2
11

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 231 publications
(264 citation statements)
references
References 40 publications
9
217
2
11
Order By: Relevance
“…It is important to emphasize that most bronchiolitis, even the most severe forms, do not require invasive mechanical ventilation with the contemporary care [24]. In our centers about 2% of bronchiolitis are admitted to a critical care unit, and between 30% and 50% of them require finally invasive mechanical ventilation.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is important to emphasize that most bronchiolitis, even the most severe forms, do not require invasive mechanical ventilation with the contemporary care [24]. In our centers about 2% of bronchiolitis are admitted to a critical care unit, and between 30% and 50% of them require finally invasive mechanical ventilation.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The multicentre RCT reported by Milesi and colleagues in a recent article in Intensive Care Medicine is therefore a welcome addition to the literature [10]. The TRAMON-TANE study was performed at five French paediatric intensive care units (PICU) and randomised 142 infants aged <6 months with moderate/severe bronchiolitis to either HFNC or nasal continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These data pave the way for a trial of oxygenation targets in critically ill children. The TRAMONTANE study randomized infants < 6 months with moderate/severe bronchiolitis to either high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) or continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) with cross-over allowed [14]. Overall, patients in both groups were rarely intubated, with similar rates of rescue using the alternative non-invasive modality, suggesting that clinician preference may be more important than the modality chosen even though initial randomization to HFNC was slightly less efficacious.…”
Section: Mechanical Ventilationmentioning
confidence: 99%