Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29037221›Full record

SynthesisSystematic reviews2017

High-flow oxygen via nasal cannulae in patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Murdoch Leeies, Eric Flynn, Alexis F Turgeon, Bojan Paunovic, Hal Loewen, Rasheda Rabbani, Ahmed M Abou-Setta, Niall D Ferguson, Ryan Zarychanski

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Systematic reviews, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
6.1field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 51 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Derivation and validation of actionable quality indicators targeting reductions in complications for injury admissions.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2022
    Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Murdoch LeeiesDepartment of Emergency Medicine, University of Manitoba, JJ399-700 William Avenue, Ann Thomas Building, Winnipeg, MB, R3E0Z3, Canada. mleeies@hsc.mb.ca.ORCID 0000-0002-7645-0791
Eric FlynnDepartment of Emergency Medicine, University of Manitoba, JJ399-700 William Avenue, Ann Thomas Building, Winnipeg, MB, R3E0Z3, Canada.
Alexis F TurgeonDivision of Critical Care Medicine, Department of Anesthesiology, Université Laval, Québec City, Québec, Canada.
Bojan PaunovicDepartment of Internal Medicine, Section of Critical Care, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada.
Hal LoewenNeil John Mclean Library, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada.
Rasheda RabbaniDepartment of Community Health Sciences, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada.
Ahmed M Abou-SettaDepartment of Community Health Sciences, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada.
Niall D FergusonDepartment of Medicine, Division of Respirology, University Health Network and Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto General Research Institute, Interdepartmental Division of Critical Care Medicine, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Ryan ZarychanskiDepartment of Internal Medicine, Section of Critical Care, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada.
University of Manitoba · CAWinnipeg Regional Health Authority · CAManitoba Health · CAMount Sinai Hospital · CAUniversité Laval · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWe performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of high-flow oxygen via nasal cannulae (HFNC) compared to non-invasive ventilation (NIV) and/or standard oxygen in patients with acute, hypoxemic respiratory failure.

methodsWe reviewed randomized controlled trials from CENTRAL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Scopus and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (inception to February 2016), conference proceedings, and relevant article reference lists. Two reviewers independently screened and extracted trial-level data from trials investigating HFNC in patients with acute, hypoxemic respiratory failure. Internal validity was assessed in duplicate using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. The strength of evidence was assessed in duplicate using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework. Our primary outcome was mortality. Secondary outcomes included dyspnea, PaO

resultsFrom 2023 screened citations, we identified seven trials (1771 patients) meeting inclusion criteria. All trials were at high risk of bias due to lack of blinding. There was no evidence for a mortality difference in patients receiving HFNC vs. NIV and/or standard oxygen (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.48, I

conclusionsIn patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure HFNC was not associated with a difference in mortality compared to NIV or standard oxygen. Secondary outcomes including dyspnea, tolerance, and safety were not systematically reported. Residual heterogeneity and variable reporting of secondary outcomes limit the conclusions that can be made in this review. Prospective trials designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of HFNC in patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure are required.

Indexed as

CannulaHypoxiaOxygen Inhalation TherapyHumansIntubationNoninvasive VentilationRespiratory Distress SyndromeAcute respiratory failureHigh flowHypoxemic respiratory failureNasal cannulaOxygen therapyRespiratory failure

Identifiers

PMID29037221
PMCPMC5644261
OpenAlexW2766627954

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.