Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35782668›Full record

ArticleIndian journal of anaesthesia2022

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

Samar M Abdel Twab, Fagr F Abdo, Maha S El Derh

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Indian journal of anaesthesia, 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
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Risk of bias in published randomised controlled trials.Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2023
    Article
  6. Thrust on airway research - Exploring the publications.Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2023
    Article
  7. Article
  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

3 authors.

Samar M Abdel TwabDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Intensive Care, and Pain Management, Faculty of Medicine, Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt.
Fagr F AbdoDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Intensive Care, and Pain Management, Faculty of Medicine, Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt.
Maha S El DerhDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Intensive Care, and Pain Management, Faculty of Medicine, Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

Indexed as

Apnoeabronchoscopesnasal cannulae

Identifiers

PMID35782668
PMCPMC9241187

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.