ArticleJournal of intensive care2020
Effect of oxygenation modalities among patients with postoperative respiratory failure: a pairwise and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Article in Journal of intensive care, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Perioperative oxygen therapy: an overview of systematic reviews and meta-analyses.British journal of anaesthesia · 2025Pooled it
- Perioperative oxygen therapy in patients undergoing surgical procedures: an overview of systematic reviews and meta-analyses.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2025Pooled it
- Effects of non-invasive respiratory support in post-operative patients: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Critical care (London, England) · 2024Pooled it
- High-flow nasal cannula for hypoxia in the post-anesthetic recovery unit: A systematic review and meta-analysis.World journal of critical care medicine · 2026Article
- Effect on post-operative pulmonary complications frequency of high flow nasal oxygen versus standard oxygen therapy in patients undergoing esophagectomy for cancer: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial-OSSIGENA study.Journal of thoracic disease · 2024Article
- Noninvasive respiratory support in the perioperative setting: a narrative review.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Review
- Personalized Noninvasive Respiratory Support in the Perioperative Setting: State of the Art and Future Perspectives.Journal of personalized medicine · 2023Review
- Perioperative oxygen therapy: a protocol for an overview of systematic reviews and meta-analyses.Systematic reviews · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPostoperative respiratory failure is associated with increased perioperative complications. Our aim is to compare outcomes between non-invasive ventilation (NIV), high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC), and standard oxygen in patients at high-risk for or with established postoperative respiratory failure.
methodsElectronic databases including PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were reviewed from inception to September 2019. We included only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared NIV, HFNC, and standard oxygen in patients at high risk for or with established postoperative respiratory failure. We performed a Bayesian network meta-analysis to calculate the odds ratio (OR) and Bayesian 95% credible intervals (CrIs).
resultsNine RCTs representing 1865 patients were included (the mean age was 61.6 ± 10.2 and 64.4% were males). In comparison with standard oxygen, NIV was associated with a significant reduction in intubation rate (OR 0.23; 95% Cr.I. 0.10-0.46), mortality (OR 0.45; 95% Cr.I. 0.27-0.71), and intensive care unit (ICU)-acquired infections (OR 0.43, 95% Cr.I. 0.25-0.70). Compared to standard oxygen, HFNC was associated with a significant reduction in intubation rate (OR 0.28, 95% Cr.I. 0.08-0.76) and ICU-acquired infections (OR 0.41; 95% Cr.I. 0.20-0.80), but not mortality (OR 0.58; 95% Cr.I. 0.26-1.22). There were no significant differences between HFNC and NIV regarding different outcomes. In a subgroup analysis, we observed a mortality benefit with NIV over standard oxygen in patients undergoing cardiothoracic surgeries but not in abdominal surgeries. Furthermore, in comparison with standard oxygen, NIV and HFNC were associated with lower intubation rates following cardiothoracic surgeries while only NIV reduced the intubation rates following abdominal surgeries.
conclusionsAmong patients with post-operative respiratory failure, HFNC and NIV were associated with significantly reduced rates of intubation and ICU-acquired infections compared with standard oxygen. Moreover, NIV was associated with reduced mortality in comparison with standard oxygen.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.