4.6 Article

The effect of 3% and 6% hypertonic saline in viral bronchiolitis: a randomised controlled trial

Journal

EUROPEAN RESPIRATORY JOURNAL
Volume 44, Issue 4, Pages 913-921

Publisher

EUROPEAN RESPIRATORY SOC JOURNALS LTD
DOI: 10.1183/09031936.00159613

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Schering Plough B.V. (Maarssen, The Netherlands)
  2. Nutricia (Zoetermeer, The Netherlands)
  3. Christine Bader Foundation from Irene Children's Hospital (Arnhem, The Netherlands)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Bronchiolitis is a common disorder in young children that often results in hospitalisation. Except for a possible effect of nebulised hypertonic saline (sodium chloride), no evidence-based therapy is available. This study investigated the efficacy of nebulised 3% and 6% hypertonic saline compared with 0.9% hypertonic saline in children hospitalised with viral bronchiolitis. In this multicentre, double-blind, randomised, controlled trial, children hospitalised with acute viral bronchiolitis were randomised to receive either nebulised 3%, 6% hypertonic saline or 0.9% normal saline during their entire hospital stay. Salbutamol was added to counteract possible bronchial constriction. The primary endpoint was the length of hospital stay. Secondary outcomes were need for supplemental oxygen and tube feeding. From the 292 children included in the study (median age 3.4 months), 247 completed the study. The median length of hospital stay did not differ between the groups: 69 h (interquartile range 57), 70 h (IQR 69) and 53 h (IQR 52), for 3% (n=84) and 6% (n=83) hypertonic saline and 0.9% (n=80) normal saline, respectively, (p=0.29). The need for supplemental oxygen or tube feeding did not differ significantly. Adverse effects were similar in the three groups. Nebulisation with hypertonic saline (3% or 6% sodium chloride) although safe, did not reduce the length of stay in hospital, duration of supplemental oxygen or tube feeding in children hospitalised with moderate-to-severe viral bronchiolitis.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available