Dataset Information

High-flow nasal cannula oxygenation in comparison with apnoeic oxygenation during foreign body removal by rigid bronchoscopy: A randomised controlled trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background and aims

This trial aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of oxygenation using a high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) compared with the standard apnoeic oxygenation technique during foreign body (FB) removal by a rigid bronchoscope.

Methods

A prospective, blinded, randomised, controlled trial was conducted on subjects planned for FB removal by a rigid bronchoscope. Inclusion criteria were male and female patients aged between 10 and 40 years. The primary outcome was the lowest oxygen saturation level monitored by pulse oximeter during the procedure, and the secondary outcome was the incidence of postoperative atelectasis.

Results

Nearly 64 patients were randomised into either HFNC oxygenation (N = 32) or apnoeic oxygenation (N = 32) group. There were no significant differences between the studied groups regarding age, gender, weight, or cardiovascular variables. Intraoperative oxygen saturation was 4% higher in the HFNC group at different times. The end-tidal carbon dioxide measured on induction and after termination by 15 min showed no significant differences between the two groups; however, it was significantly higher in the apnoeic oxygenation group immediately after the procedure, after 5 min, and after 10 min of termination. No adverse effects from the increased end-tidal carbon dioxide were reported.

Conclusion

HFNC was superior to apnoeic oxygenation technique in maintaining oxygenation status in patients undergoing rigid bronchoscopy for FB removal.

SUBMITTER: Abdel Twab SM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9241187 | biostudies-literature | 2022 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

High-flow nasal cannula oxygenation in comparison with apnoeic oxygenation during foreign body removal by rigid bronchoscopy: A randomised controlled trial.

Abdel Twab Samar M SM Abdo Fagr F FF El Derh Maha S MS

Indian journal of anaesthesia 20220519 5

<h4>Background and aims</h4>This trial aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of oxygenation using a high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) compared with the standard apnoeic oxygenation technique during foreign body (FB) removal by a rigid bronchoscope.<h4>Methods</h4>A prospective, blinded, randomised, controlled trial was conducted on subjects planned for FB removal by a rigid bronchoscope. Inclusion criteria were male and female patients aged between 10 and 40 years. The primary outcome was the low ...[more]

PMID: 35782668

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionApnoeic oxygenation using nasal high-flow oxygen delivery systems with heated and humidified oxygen has recently gained popularity in the anaesthesia community. It has been shown to allow a prolonged apnoea time of up to 65 min as CO2 increase was far slower compared with previously reported data from CO2 increase during apnoea. A ventilatory exchange due to the high nasal oxygen flow was proposed explaining that phenomenon. However, recent studies in children did not show any difference in CO2 clearance comparing high-flow with low-flow oxygen. To investigate this ventilatory exchange in adults, we plan this study comparing different oxygen flow rates and the increase of CO2 during apnoea. We hypothesise that CO2 clearance is non-inferior when applying low oxygen flow rates.Methods and analysisIn this single-centre, single-blinded, randomised controlled trial, we randomly assign 100 patients planned for elective surgery to either control (oxygen 70 L/min, airway opened by laryngoscopy) or one of three intervention groups: oxygen 70, or 10, or 2 L/min, all with jaw thrust to secure airway patency. After anaesthesia induction and neuromuscular blockage, either one of the interventions or the control will be applied according to randomisation. Throughout the apnoea period, we will measure the increase of transcutaneous pCO2 (tcpCO2) until any one of the following criteria is met: time=15 min, SpO2 <92%, tcpCO2 >10.67 kPa, art. pH <7.1, K+ >6.0 mmol/L. Primary outcome is the mean tcpCO2 increase in kPa/min.Ethics and disseminationAfter Cantonal Ethic Committee of Bern approval (ID 2018-00293, 22.03.2018), all study participants will provide written informed consent. Patients vulnerable towards hypoxia or hypercarbia are excluded. Study results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at national and international conferences.Trial registration numberThis study was registered on www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03478774,Pre-results) and the Swiss Trial Registry KOFAM (SNCTP000002861).

Project description:BackgroundCombining oxygen facemask with apnoeic oxygenation using high-flow-nasal-oxygen (HFNO) for preoxygenation in the operating room has not been studied against standard oxygen facemask alone. We hypothesized that facemask-alone would be associated with lower levels of lowest end-tidal oxygen (EtO2) within 2 min after intubation in comparison with facemask combined with HFNO.MethodsIn an international prospective before-after multicentre study, we included adult patients intubated in the operating room from September 2022 to December 2022. In the before period, preoxygenation was performed with facemask-alone, which was removed during laryngoscopy. In the after period, facemask combined with HFNO was used for preoxygenation and HFNO for apnoeic oxygenation during laryngoscopy. HFNO was maintained throughout intubation. The primary outcome was the lowest EtO2 within 2 min after intubation. The secondary outcome was SpO2 ≤ 95% within 2 min after intubation. Subgroup analyses were performed in patients without and with obesity. This study was registered 10 August 2022 with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT05495841.ResultsA total of 450 intubations were evaluated, 233 with facemask-alone and 217 with facemask combined with HFNO. In all patients, the lowest EtO2 within 2 min after intubation was significantly lower with facemask-alone than with facemask combined with HFNO, 89 (85-92)% vs 91 (88-93)%, respectively (mean difference - 2.20(- 3.21 to - 1.18), p < 0.001). In patients with obesity, similar results were found [87(82-91)% vs 90(88-92)%, p = 0.004]; as in patients without obesity [90(86-92)% vs 91(89-93)%, p = 0.001)]. SpO2 ≤ 95% was more frequent with facemask-alone (14/232, 6%) than with facemask combined with HFNO (2/215, 1%, p = 0.004). No severe adverse events were recorded.ConclusionsCombining facemask with HFNO for preoxygenation and apnoeic oxygenation was associated with increased levels of lowest EtO2 within 2 min after intubation and less desaturation.

Project description:IntroductionApnoeic oxygenation is a process of delivering continuous oxygen through nasal cannula during direct laryngoscopy. The oxygen that is delivered through these nasal cannulas is either low flow or high flow. Although the effectiveness of apnoeic oxygenation has been shown through systematic reviews and randomised controlled trials, a comparison of high-flow versus low-flow oxygen delivery has not been tested through a superiority study design. In this study we propose to assess the effectiveness of giving low-flow oxygen with head side elevation versus high-flow oxygen with head side elevation against the usual practice of care in which no oxygen is provided during direct laryngoscopy.Methods and analysisThis will be a three-arm study instituting a block randomisation technique with a sample size of 46 in each arm (see table 1). Due to the nature of the intervention, no blinding will be introduced. The primary outcomes will be lowest non-invasive oxygen saturation measurement during direct laryngoscopy and during the 2 min after the placement of the tube and the first pass success rate. The intervention constitutes head side elevation up to 30° for improving glottis visualisation together with low-flow or high-flow oxygen delivery through nasal cannula to increase safe apnoea time for participants undergoing endotracheal intubation. Primary analysis will be intention to treat.Ethics and disseminationThe study is approved by the Ethical Review Committee of Aga Khan University Hospital (2019-0726-2463). The project is an institution University Research Committee grant recipient 192 002ER-PK. The results of the study will be disseminated among participants, patient communities and healthcare professionals in the institution through seminars, presentations and emails. Further, the findings will be published in a highly accessed peer-reviewed medical journal and will be presented at both national and international conferences.Trial registration numberClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT04242537).

Project description:BackgroundHigh flow nasal cannula is gaining increasingly used in patients undergoing endoscopic procedures. We undertook this systematic review and meta-analysis to determine whether high flow nasal cannula (HFNC) could effectively minimize the risk of hypoxemia as compared with conventional oxygen therapy (COT).MethodsWe performed a comprehensive search of Pubmed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Embase, and Web of Science. Studies involving the application of HFNC during endoscopic procedures were identified.ResultsWe included 15 randomized controlled trials (7 bronchoscopy, 8 gastrointestinal endoscopy). Patients receiving HFNC during endoscopic procedures had a significantly lower risk of hypoxemia (defined as SpO2 < 90%) versus COT group (risk ratio = 0.32; 95%CI (0.22-0.47), 13 studies, 4,093 patients, moderate-quality evidence, I 2 = 48.82%, P < 0.001). The lowest SpO2 was significantly higher in HFNC group (mean difference = 4.41; 95%CI (2.95-5.86), 9 studies, 1,449 patients, moderate-quality evidence, I 2 = 81.17%, P < 0.001) than those receiving COT. No significant difference was detected between groups in end-procedure partial pressure of CO2 (standard mean difference = -0.18; 95%CI (-0.52-0.15), 5 studies, 238 patients, moderate-quality evidence, I 2 = 42.25%, P = 0.29). Patients receiving HFNC were associated a lower need for airway intervention (risk ratio = 0.45; 95%CI (0.24-0.84), 8 studies, 2,872 patients, moderate-quality evidence, I 2 = 85.97%, P = 0.01) and less procedure interruption (risk ratio = 0.36; 95%CI (0.26-0.51), 6 studies, 1,562 patients, moderate-quality evidence, I 2 = 0.00%, P < 0.001). The overall intubation rate after endoscopy was 0.20% in both group, with no difference detected (risk ratio = 1.00; 95%CI (0.30-3.35), 7 studies, 2,943 patients, low-quality evidence, I 2 = 0.00%, P = 1.00).ConclusionThis systematic review and meta-analysis found moderate to low evidence that the application of HFNC was associated with improved oxygenation, decreased need for airway intervention, and reduced procedure interruption in patients undergoing endoscopic procedures. Future larger sample and high-quality studies are warranted to confirm our result and further investigate the effectiveness of HFNC in patients at risk. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier: CRD42022298032.

Dataset Information

High-flow nasal cannula oxygenation in comparison with apnoeic oxygenation during foreign body removal by rigid bronchoscopy: A randomised controlled trial.

Background and aims

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

High-flow nasal cannula oxygenation in comparison with apnoeic oxygenation during foreign body removal by rigid bronchoscopy: A randomised controlled trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets