Nebulisers and Saline Instillation in PCCU

Advanced 17 min read

Nebulisers and Saline Instillation in PCCU

By Lauren Murphy · 2024

Airway Management & Secretion Clearance

Source: saline instillation+nebs in I+V pts.pptx (24 slides) Author: Lauren Murphy (B6PT) Date: January 2024 Learning Level: 🟡 Intermediate through 🔴 Advanced


1. Learning Objectives

Aim

To work with other PCCUs across London to help standardise current practice across PCCU and ensure the team stays up to date with current literature regarding saline instillation and nebuliser usage in intubated and ventilated patients.


2. Overview of Common Nebulisers

🟢 Foundation / 🟡 Intermediate

CategoryMedications
BronchodilatorsAtrovent (ipratropium bromide), Salbutamol, Adrenaline
MucolyticsHypertonic Saline (3% and 7%), N-Acetylcysteine (NAC), DNase (dornase alfa) — can be given as nebuliser or instillation
Normal saline0.9% NaCl — can be instilled or nebulised
Other nebulisersMgSO4 (if very wheezy), Adrenaline nebulisers

3. Bronchodilators — Detailed Pharmacology

🟡 Intermediate

3.1 Atrovent (Ipratropium Bromide)

Classification: Antimuscarinic bronchodilator

Mechanism of action: Blocks muscarinic receptors found on the smooth muscle surrounding the airways, causing them to dilate.

Indications:

Pharmacokinetics:

Cautions (when used by inhalation):

Preparation Note: If dilution of ipratropium bromide nebuliser solution is necessary, use only sterile sodium chloride 0.9%.

3.2 Salbutamol

Classification: Beta-2 agonist (selective)

Mechanism of action: Activates the beta-2 receptors on the muscles surrounding airways, causing relaxation of smooth muscle.

Indications:

Dosing (by inhalation of aerosol):

Important: The dose given by nebuliser is substantially higher than that given by inhaler.

Preparation Note: For nebulisation, dilute nebuliser solution with a suitable volume of sterile Sodium Chloride 0.9% solution according to nebuliser type and duration of administration. Salbutamol and ipratropium bromide solutions are compatible and can be mixed for nebulisation.

Cautions:

Hypokalaemia Warning: Potentially serious hypokalaemia may result from beta-2 agonist therapy. Particular caution is required in severe asthma or COPD, because this effect may be potentiated by concomitant treatment with theophylline and its derivatives, corticosteroids, diuretics, and by hypoxia.

Additional cautions for all beta-2-adrenoceptor agonists (selective):

3.3 Adrenaline (Nebulised)

Classification: Non-selective adrenergic agonist (alpha and beta receptor stimulant)

Mechanism of action: Stimulates alpha and beta receptors in the sympathetic nervous system, inhibiting an enzyme in smooth muscle. Note: also increases HR and BP by increasing cardiac output.


4. Mucolytics — Detailed Pharmacology

🟡 Intermediate / 🔴 Advanced

Mucoactive substances act to increase the ability to expectorate sputum or to decrease mucus hypersecretion. Expectorants and mucolytics are examples of mucoactive substances.

4.1 Hypertonic Sodium Chloride Solution (3% / 6% / 7% HTS)

Mechanism of action: Increases the amount of sodium and chloride in airway surface liquid, thereby increasing the osmotic gradient and rehydrating the mucus layer.

Indications:

Dosing (by inhalation of nebulised solution):

Adverse effects: Temporary irritation, such as coughing, hoarseness, or reversible bronchoconstriction may occur.

Clinical Tip: An inhaled bronchodilator can be used before treatment with hypertonic sodium chloride to reduce the risk of adverse effects.

Key Evidence:

Important: Hypertonic saline 7% should NOT be given via a vibrating mesh nebuliser.

4.2 N-Acetylcysteine (NAC)

Mechanism of action: Severs disulphide bonds that link mucin monomers to polymers and solubilises sputum. It is also an antioxidant and anti-inflammatory agent.

Role in mechanically ventilated patients: NAC has a role in reducing lung inflammation and dislodging mucus secretions in mechanically ventilated patients.

Caution: In vitro studies have demonstrated that NAC rapidly decreases mucus viscosity; however, it may increase the risk of bronchospasm due to its acidic pH (pH = 2.2). This risk may be mitigated by:

  • Pre-treatment with a bronchodilator, OR
  • Utilising a reduced concentration of NAC (10% as opposed to 20% concentration)

Reference: Sheffner et al., 1964; Henke and Ratjen, 2007

Evidence in neonates: NAC in pre-term neonates caused no benefits and increased airway resistance and bradycardias.

4.3 Dornase Alfa (DNase)

Classification: Genetically engineered version of a naturally occurring human enzyme.

Mechanism of action: Peptide mucolytic that cleaves extracellular deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA). Hydrolyses DNA polymer and reduces DNA length.

Licensed indication: Management of cystic fibrosis patients with a forced vital capacity (FVC) of greater than 40% of predicted to improve pulmonary function.

Dosing (by inhalation of nebulised solution):

Timing: Expert sources advise usually once daily at least 1 hour BEFORE physiotherapy.


5. Bronchiolitis — Context for Nebuliser Use

🟢 Foundation

5.1 Overview

5.2 NICE Guidelines for Bronchiolitis

RecommendationDetails
PhysiotherapyNo physiotherapy unless significant co-morbidities or intubated
TreatmentUse oxygen therapy, CPAP and IV fluids
SuctionNo indication for regular suction (unless respiratory distress)
NebulisersNo indication for routine nebulisers
PreventionMay be offered Palivizumab vaccination against RSV (see updated note below)

Updated (2026): Palivizumab is more accurately described as passive immunisation with a monoclonal antibody rather than a “vaccination”. From 2025, nirsevimab (a longer-acting, single-dose monoclonal antibody) has begun replacing palivizumab in NHS England, alongside the maternal RSV vaccine Abrysvo. See JCVI statement, 11 September 2023.


6. Literature Review: Mucolytics on PCCU

🔴 Advanced

6.1 Overview of Evidence Base

A review of 9 journal articles was conducted, including:

Studies examined nebulised and instilled mucolytics and 0.9% saline.

6.2 Hypertonic Saline Evidence

Study 1: Nebulised HTS in Children with Bronchiolitis on PICU (2019, Retrospective)

ElementDetail
Participants104 children <2 years old admitted to PICU with bronchiolitis
Groups45 given 3% HTS (74% RSV+ve) vs 59 given none (70% RSV+ve)
Key resultsNo significant difference in disease severity, total duration of respiratory support, or length of hospital stay between the two groups
ConclusionsStudy suggests shorter duration of respiratory support and LOS at PICU with use of nebulised HS in RSV bronchiolitis patients
LimitationsRetrospective study; no validated tool used to assess severity of bronchiolitis

Study 2: Mucoactive Medications in Paediatric Airway Disease (2020, Review)

ElementDetail
Participants427 children on PICU receiving ventilator support given either no saline or 0.225-0.9% HTS; 18 children on PICU receiving routine nebulisation with 3% HTS versus 0.9% saline
Key resultsNon-blinded trial; no statistically significant differences in duration of mechanical ventilation, oxygen therapy, or PICU stay between groups. No differences for duration of mechanical ventilation or chest X-ray atelectasis score, or respiratory mechanics parameters before and after intervention
ConclusionsThis review does not make any recommendations on routine mucoactive medication strategies for PICU patients possible. Merely reveals the need for further randomised trials
LimitationsNon-blinding of trials; small sample size; no explanation of characteristics or reason for PICU admission

Study 3: HTS in Mechanically Ventilated Patients (from Mucus Clearance Review 2022)

ElementDetail
Participants18 paediatric patients undergoing mechanical ventilation randomised to nebulised 3% HTS versus 0.9% saline four times daily until seven days or extubation (prophylactic)
Key resultsGreater duration of mechanical ventilation among patients receiving HTS (Shein et al., 2016)
NotePatients randomised to HTS group had markers of greater illness severity at baseline compared to NS group

Study 4: HTS vs NS — No Significant Difference

ElementDetail
Key findingsNo statistically significant difference between HTS and normal saline in chest X-ray scores or oxygenation (Youness et al., 2012)

6.3 DNase (Dornase Alfa) Evidence

Study 1: Intrapulmonary Drug Administration Review (2011, Comprehensive Review)

ElementDetail
Key findingsDNase reduced ventilation days in children with congenital heart disease, and is effective in resolving atelectasis in children without CF who are I+V
Evidence qualityFrom other meta-analysis of RCTs or a high quality systematic review of case-control studies or a low grade RCT, but with high probability that the relationship is causal

Study 2: DNase in Mechanically Ventilated Children with Bronchiolitis (2022, Retrospective Cohort)

ElementDetail
Participants72 children intubated on PICU with confirmed bronchiolitis; 41 given DNase, 31 not given DNase
Key resultsChildren who received dornase alfa were intubated for an average of 33.04 hours longer than standard of care children. Children who received dornase alfa stayed in the PICU an average of 2.05 days longer than standard of care patients
ConclusionsEmphasises the need for an RCT. There is still no data to support the use of dornase alfa in this specific population
LimitationsOnly utilising ICD codes; no assessment of baseline severity of bronchiolitis prior to administering DNase; utilising SpO2 instead of PaO2 goes against standards proposed by The Second Paediatric Acute Lung Injury Consensus Conference

Study 3: DNase in the PICU — Literature and National Survey (2020)

ElementDetail
ParticipantsSystematic review: one RCT; intratracheal DNase compared with normal saline twice daily in children after cardiac surgery (n=88)
Key resultsNo difference in reintubation rates (primary outcome); observed a reduction in duration of mechanical ventilation by approximately 1 day (52 vs 82 hours, 36% reduction, p<0.05) in favour of DNase
ConclusionsInsufficient evidence to recommend DNase as a routine treatment for airway mucus obstruction or atelectasis in critically ill children with non-CF diseases in the PICU
LimitationsOnly one RCT found focusing on a very specific patient group; publication bias or threat to study validity based on financial support from manufacturer without prior study protocol registration

Study 4: Mucus Clearance in Ventilated Patients (2022 Review — DNase arm)

ElementDetail
ParticipantsOne paediatric study: 100 infants undergoing mechanical ventilation following cardiac surgery randomised to dornase alfa and placebo. Regimen: 0.1-0.2 mg/kg twice daily from surgery until extubation (Riethmueller et al., 2006)
Key resultsNo statistically significant difference between groups, but a trend toward improvement in atelectasis scores in the dornase alfa group compared to HTS and NS groups
Additional studyYouness et al. (2012): 33 adult mechanically ventilated patients with new onset lobar/multilobar collapse randomised to 7% HTS, dornase alfa, or NS twice daily for 7 days. No difference in chest X-ray scores (primary outcome), but intervention group showed improved oxygenation and more extubation on treatment day 1 (Zitter et al., 2013)

Updated (2026): The summary above understates the Riethmueller 2006 findings. The original paper (Pediatr Pulmonol. 2006;41(1):61-6. DOI: 10.1002/ppul.20298. PMID: 16265663) — titled “Recombinant human deoxyribonuclease shortens ventilation time in young, mechanically ventilated children” — enrolled 100 infants and reported lower incidence of atelectasis (6 vs 17), shorter median ventilation time (2.2 vs 3.4 days), and shorter median PICU stay (7 vs 8 days) in the dornase alfa group, with the ventilation time difference reaching statistical significance. The 2022 review summary characterising this only as “a trend” therefore understates the result. Note that Youness 2012 was an adult (not paediatric) study. The Zitter 2013 paper actually reported oxygenation improvement at day 5 (P=.03) rather than day 1.

Study 5: Combination HTS/DNase

ElementDetail
ParticipantsRetrospective case-control cohort study: 7% HTS and dornase alfa in mechanically ventilated neonates with atelectasis unresponsive to conventional airway clearance. Both medications given twice daily
Key resultsAll treatment arms experienced greater improvement in atelectasis compared to control: 27% control, 70% HTS, 81% dornase alfa, 95% combination therapy

6.4 N-Acetylcysteine (NAC) Evidence

Study 1: NAC in Pre-term Neonates (from 2011 Review)

ElementDetail
Key findingsNAC in pre-term neonates caused no benefits and increased airway resistance and bradycardias
Evidence qualityFrom other meta-analysis of RCTs or a high quality systematic review of case-control studies

Study 2: Mucus Clearance Review (2022 — NAC arm)

ElementDetail
ParticipantsRCT of 40 mechanically ventilated patients. Nebulised NAC: 2 mL of 20% NAC diluted within 8 mL of normal saline administered three times daily for 1 day
Key resultsFound lower mean secretion density and increased oxygen saturation but failed to demonstrate superiority in comparison to normal saline nebulisation (Masoompour et al., 2015)
ConclusionsData supporting use of NAC as a mucolytic in the mechanically ventilated population is limited

Study 3: Role of NAC in Secretion Clearance in Mechanically Ventilated Patients (2019)

ElementDetail
ParticipantsRCT, 2018-2019. 50 patients enrolled (more males than females), aged 15-80 years, nebulised NAC in mechanically ventilated adults >24 hours. Intervention: NAC 2 mL with 8 mL normal saline TDS for 1 day. Control: 10 mL 0.9% saline TDS
Key resultsNo statistically significant differences between SpO2, FiO2, mortality, Ppeak, plateau pressure, or secretion density throughout time periods
ConclusionsNAC effective in secretion clearance but nil difference in outcomes compared to 0.9% saline
LimitationsLimited sample size; limited time period; started after 24 hours of intubation

Study 4: Nebulised NAC on Respiratory Secretions — RCT (2015)

ElementDetail
ParticipantsRCT on 10-bed adult ICU in Shiraz, 2012. 40 patients aged 15-90 years (mean age 59 in 21 females and 50 in 19 males), I+V >72 hours. Randomly allocated to control group (0.9% saline nebs TDS) or nebulised NAC
Dosing notePilot study used 3 mL NAC 20% with 3 mL normal saline — induced bronchospasm — therefore actual study dropped to NAC 2 mL with 8 mL normal saline TDS for 1 day
Key resultsNo adverse effects of NAC; nil difference in plateau or PIP; NAC significantly increased SpO2; mean secretion density lower in NAC group but did not differ significantly between time points
ConclusionsNebulised NAC via ETT was not more effective than 0.9% saline nebulisers in reducing density of mucous plugs
LimitationsUnable to measure viscosity of secretions; short time period of 24 hours

NAC Case Reports: Status Asthmaticus

From speaker notes (detailed clinical narrative):

6.5 Summary of Mucus Clearance Review (2022) Limitations

“It is beneficial to use mucoactive therapies in combination with cough augmentation strategies, however more studies need robust validation and standardisation.”

“Complex mucus treated with potent mucolytics should be better explored for mucus plugging resulting in atelectasis and prolonged ventilatory failure.”

“This data suggests that there is reason to utilise mucolytic and expectorant therapies in patients requiring mechanical ventilation, especially in those with excessive secretions and approaching extubation. However, the available evidence in critically ill patients is based on anecdotal data and expert recommendations, rather than validated studies, which limits drawing a definitive conclusion for the standardisation of treatment regimens in critically ill patients.”


7. Main Aims of Respiratory Physiotherapy on PCCU

🟢 Foundation


8. Key Learning Points and Clinical Reasoning

🟡 Intermediate / 🔴 Advanced

8.1 Summary of Evidence

8.2 Clinical Reasoning Framework for Nebuliser Selection

When considering nebuliser use during treatments, ask:

  1. Are they wheezy? Is there evidence of gas trapping on the ventilator?
  2. Are secretions too thick to clear with 0.9% saline instillation alone?
  3. If secretions are thick AND the patient is wheezy, what other options are available? Consider utilising NAC and DNase.

Key Message: “If you’re not sure… ASK! Peer support, senior support, chat through clinical reasoning. You can always try a treatment and if it is not as effective, try something else!“


9. Cross-References to Other Modules


10. References

  1. BNF and BNFc (NICE)

  2. Otu, A., Langridge, P. and Denning, D.W. Nebulised N-Acetylcysteine for Unresponsive Bronchial Obstruction in Allergic Bronchopulmonary Aspergillosis: A Case Series and Review of the Literature.

  3. Nebulised hypertonic saline in children with bronchiolitis admitted to the paediatric intensive care unit: A retrospective study. 2019.

  4. Intrapulmonary drug administration in neonatal and paediatric critical care: a comprehensive review. 2011.

  5. Rational use of mucoactive medications to treat pediatric airway disease. 2020.

  6. Dornase alfa in mechanically ventilated children with bronchiolitis: A retrospective cohort study. 2022.

  7. Use of dornase alfa in the paediatric intensive care unit: current literature and a national cross-sectional survey. 2020.

  8. Mucus Clearance Strategies in Mechanically Ventilated Patients. 2022.

  9. Role of N-Acetylcysteine in Clearance of Secretions in Mechanical Ventilated Patients. 2019.

  10. Evaluation of the Effect of Nebulized N-Acetylcysteine on Respiratory Secretions in Mechanically Ventilated Patients: Randomized Clinical Trial. 2015.

  11. The effects of N-acetylcysteine on lung alveolar epithelial cells infected with respiratory syncytial virus. 2023.

Additional References Cited in Speaker Notes