Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35451383›Full record

SynthesisMedicine2022

A comparison of high-flow nasal cannula and standard facemask as pre-oxygenation technique for general anesthesia: A PRISMA-compliant systemic review and meta-analysis.

Hsien-Cheng Kuo, Wan-Chi Liu, Chun-Cheng Li, Yih-Giun Cherng, Jui-Tai Chen, Hsiang-Ling Wu, Ying-Hsuan Tai

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Hsien-Cheng KuoDepartment of Anesthesiology, Shuang Ho Hospital, Taipei Medical University, New Taipei City, Taiwan.
Wan-Chi LiuDepartment of Anesthesiology, Shuang Ho Hospital, Taipei Medical University, New Taipei City, Taiwan.
Chun-Cheng LiDepartment of Anesthesiology, Shuang Ho Hospital, Taipei Medical University, New Taipei City, Taiwan.
Yih-Giun CherngDepartment of Anesthesiology, Shuang Ho Hospital, Taipei Medical University, New Taipei City, Taiwan.
Jui-Tai ChenDepartment of Anesthesiology, Shuang Ho Hospital, Taipei Medical University, New Taipei City, Taiwan.
Hsiang-Ling WuDepartment of Anesthesiology, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan.
Ying-Hsuan TaiDepartment of Anesthesiology, Shuang Ho Hospital, Taipei Medical University, New Taipei City, Taiwan.ORCID 0000-0002-5210-6873
Taipei Medical University-Shuang Ho Hospital · TWNational Yang Ming Chiao Tung University · TW

Funding

Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan MOST109-2314-B-038-024Taipei Medical University TMU110-AE1-B11
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCurrent practice guidelines recommend the use of nasal cannula as an alternative pre-oxygenation method for tracheal intubation. However, the efficacy of high-flow nasal oxygenation versus standard facemask oxygenation has not been fully evaluated.

methodsWe searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov for English-language studies published from January 1, 2000 to November 30, 2021. We included randomized controlled trials which compared high-flow nasal oxygenation and facemask oxygenation as the pre-oxygenation maneuver. Primary outcome was arterial partial pressure of oxygen (PaO2) after pre-oxygenation. Secondary outcomes were safe apnea time, arterial desaturation during intubation, lowest peripheral capillary oxygen saturation during intubation, and patient comfort score. Random-effects models and Mantel-Haenszel method were used for data synthesis.

resultsA total of 16 randomized controlled trials and 1148 patients were included. High-flow nasal oxygenation achieved a higher PaO2 compared with facemask, mean difference: 64.86 mm Hg (95% confidence interval [CI]: 32.33-97.40, P < .0001). Safe apnea time was longer in high-flow nasal oxygenation, mean difference: 131.03 seconds (95% CI: 59.39-202.66, P < .0001). There was no difference in the risk of peri-intubation desaturation or lowest peripheral capillary oxygen saturation between groups. Patient comfort score was higher in high-flow nasal oxygenation, mean difference: 1.00 (95% CI: 0.46-1.54, P = .0003).

conclusionHigh-flow nasal oxygenation better enhanced PaO2 and extended safe apnea time and is not inferior to facemask oxygenation in preventing desaturation during tracheal intubation. High-flow nasal oxygenation may be considered as an alternative method, especially for patients with a potential difficult airway.

Indexed as

ApneaCannulaAnesthesia, GeneralHumansIntubation, IntratrachealOxygenRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicOxygen

Identifiers

PMID35451383
PMCPMC8913129
OpenAlexW4224289967

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.