Responses

Download PDFPDF
Nebulised hypertonic saline in moderate-to-severe bronchiolitis: a randomised clinical trial
Compose Response

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g. higgs-boson@gmail.com
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Statement of Competing Interests

PLEASE NOTE:

  • A rapid response is a moderated but not peer reviewed online response to a published article in a BMJ journal; it will not receive a DOI and will not be indexed unless it is also republished as a Letter, Correspondence or as other content. Find out more about rapid responses.
  • We intend to post all responses which are approved by the Editor, within 14 days (BMJ Journals) or 24 hours (The BMJ), however timeframes cannot be guaranteed. Responses must comply with our requirements and should contribute substantially to the topic, but it is at our absolute discretion whether we publish a response, and we reserve the right to edit or remove responses before and after publication and also republish some or all in other BMJ publications, including third party local editions in other countries and languages
  • Our requirements are stated in our rapid response terms and conditions and must be read. These include ensuring that: i) you do not include any illustrative content including tables and graphs, ii) you do not include any information that includes specifics about any patients,iii) you do not include any original data, unless it has already been published in a peer reviewed journal and you have included a reference, iv) your response is lawful, not defamatory, original and accurate, v) you declare any competing interests, vi) you understand that your name and other personal details set out in our rapid response terms and conditions will be published with any responses we publish and vii) you understand that once a response is published, we may continue to publish your response and/or edit or remove it in the future.
  • By submitting this rapid response you are agreeing to our terms and conditions for rapid responses and understand that your personal data will be processed in accordance with those terms and our privacy notice.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Vertical Tabs

Other responses

  • Published on:
    Letter to Editor Nebulised hypertonic saline in moderate-to-severe bronchiolitis: a randomised clinical trial. Raphaelle Jaquet-Pilloud, Marie-Elise Verga, Michel Russo, Mario Gehri, Jean-Yves Pauchard
    • Muthukumar Sakthivel, Attending Physician, Pediatric Emergency Department Sidra Medicine, Qatar
    • Other Contributors:
      • Dure Yasrab, Resident, Pediatrics
      • Kevin Enright, Attending Physician, Pediatric Emergency Department
      • Colin VE Powell, Professor, Senior Attending Physician, Pediatric Emergency Department

    Dear Editor

    We enjoyed reading the study by Jaquet-Pilloud et al. 1 examining the role of nebulised 3% hypertonic saline (HS) and bronchiolitis. We thank the authors for this excellent pragmatic non-blinded, randomised controlled trial. Their conclusions support the UK evidence from the SABRE study 2 and their systematic review3 which provides evidence of the futility of adding hypertonic saline to the management of bronchiolitis when compared to standard care alone with length of stay (LOS) or ready for discharge as the primary outcome. The article was well written and easy to follow. The study examined 121 infants with bronchiolitis recruited over three years from one tertiary centre in Switzerland. We felt it illustrated the very important problem of underpowered studies concluding no differences between two treatment regimens. The authors used the Korppi et al 3 study to assume that the mean LOS for infants admitted to hospital with bronchiolitis was 5 days [120 hours] with a standard deviation of 1.2 days [28.8 hours]. Reduction in hospital stay by 1 day was considered clinically significant and based on this a minimum sample size of 120 (with 60 in each group) was arrived. However the data from this paper by Jaquet-Pilloud et al show that the mean LOS was 47 hours (± 8.5) for nebulised hypertonic saline group and 50.4 hours (±11) for standard care group. The LOS at the authors’ hospital was less than half of the assumption used for their power calculation....

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.