In Reply We thank Tanguay-Rioux et al for their careful reading and response, which allows us to clarify some points of our study. First, given the burden of acute bronchiolitis in infants, a treatment reducing hospital admission even by few percentage points should not be neglected. However, as stated by Ralston,¹ demonstrating a slight efficacy in the experimental conditions of a randomized clinical trial does not imply a clinical pertinence in daily practice. For example, in a randomized clinical trial, patients are enrolled based on rigorous criteria, while a much larger phenotype of patients will be met in daily practice. The same applies to where and how the treatment is delivered. This point associated with adverse effects, and the cost of hypertonic saline (HS) nebulizations makes the clinical utility of such treatment very unlikely.

在答复中，我们感谢Tanguay-Rioux等人的认真阅读和回应，这使我们能够阐明研究的一些要点。首先，考虑到婴儿患急性毛细支气管炎的负担，不应忽略减少住院率甚至减少几个百分点的治疗。但是，正如Ralston所述¹在随机临床试验的实验条件下显示出轻微疗效并不意味着在日常实践中具有临床意义。例如，在一项随机临床试验中，根据严格的标准招募患者，而在日常实践中将满足更大的患者表型。这同样适用于在何处以及如何进行治疗。与不良反应有关的这一点，以及高渗盐水（HS）雾化的费用使这种治疗的临床应用变得非常不可能。