Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36170281›Full record

Trial reportPloS one2022

Changes in lung volume estimated by electrical impedance tomography during apnea and high-flow nasal oxygenation: A single-center randomized controlled trial.

Thomas Riedel, Fabian Bürgi, Robert Greif, Heiko Kaiser, Thomas Riva, Lorenz Theiler, Sabine Nabecker

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled TrialEquivalence Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03478774 (Physiology Regarding Apnoeic Oxygenation During Nasal Cannula Therapy at Different Flow Rates), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 33% 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.

NCT03478774 nacompletednot on this map

Physiology Regarding Apnoeic Oxygenation During Nasal Cannula Therapy at Different Flow Rates

TypeinterventionalSponsorInsel Gruppe AG, University Hospital BernRan2018 to 2019Enrolled125ConditionsApnoeic OxygenationArmsOxygen 70l/min, Oxygen 10 l/min, Oxygen 2l/min, Jaw thrust, Videolaryngoscopy
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. 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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.

Thomas RiedelDivision of Paediatric Intensive Care Medicine, Department of Paediatrics, University Children's Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-7153-5251
Fabian BürgiDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Robert GreifDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0003-0160-2073
Heiko KaiserDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Thomas RivaDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Lorenz TheilerDepartment of Anaesthesia, Kantonsspital Aarau, Aarau, Switzerland.
Sabine NabeckerDepartment of Anesthesiology and Pain Management, Sinai Health System, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
University of Bern · CHKantonsspital Aarau · CHSigmund Freud Privatuniversität Wien · ATUniversity of Toronto · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPrevious studies concerning humidified, heated high-flow nasal oxygen delivered in spontaneously breathing patients postulated an increase in functional residual capacity as one of its physiological effects. It is unclear wheter this is also true for patients under general anesthesia. METHODOLOGY: The sincle-center noninferiority trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT NCT03478774). This secondary outcome analysis shows estimated differences in lung volume changes using electrical impedance tomography between different flow rates of 100% oxygen in apneic, anesthetized and paralyzed adults prior to intubation. One hundred and twenty five patients were randomized to five groups with different flow rates of 100% oxygen: i) minimal-flow: 0.25 l.min-1 via endotracheal tube; ii) low-flow: 2 l.min-1 + continuous jaw thrust; iii) medium-flow: 10 l.min-1 + continuous jaw thrust; iv) high-flow: 70l.min-1 + continuous jaw thrust; and v) control: 70 l.min-1 + continuous video-laryngoscopy. After standardized anesthesia induction with non-depolarizing neuromuscular blockade, the 15-minute apnea period and oxygen delivery was started according to the randomized flow rate. Continuous electrical impedance tomography measurements were performed during the 15-minute apnea period. Total change in lung impedance (an estimate of changes in lung volume) over the 15-minute apnea period and times to 25%, 50% and 75% of total impedance change were calculated.

resultsOne hundred and twenty five patients completed the original study. Six patients did not complete the 15-minute apnea period. Due to maloperation, malfunction and artefacts additional 54 measurements had to be excluded, resulting in 65 patients included into this secondary outcome analysis. We found no differences between groups with respect to decrease in lung impedance or curve progression over the observation period.

conclusionsDifferent flow rates of humidified 100% oxygen during apnea result in comparable decreases in lung volumes. The demonstrated increase in functional residual capacity during spontaneous breathing with high-flow nasal oxygenation could not be replicated during apnea under general anesthesia with neuromuscular blockade.

Indexed as

ApneaLungAdultElectric ImpedanceHumansLung Volume MeasurementsOxygenOxygen Inhalation TherapyTomographyOxygen

Identifiers

PMID36170281
PMCPMC9518885
OpenAlexW4297460935

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.