ArticleCureus2023
Transnasal Humidified Rapid-Insufflation Ventilatory Exchange Versus Conventional Facemask Breathing for Preoxygenation During Rapid Sequence Induction.
Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- High-flow nasal oxygen versus face-mask ventilation for rapid sequence induction in non-elective surgical patients: a randomized controlled trial.BMC anesthesiology · 2026Trial
- High-flow nasal oxygen in the perioperative period: Enough evidence, or questions still unanswered?Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2026Article
- Preoxygenation with high-flow nasal oxygen versus conventional techniques using anatomical face mask in patients undergoing exploratory laparotomy: A randomised comparative study.Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2026Article
- Noninvasive respiratory support for preoxygenation in emergency intubation: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.ERJ open research · 2025Article
- Emergency department airway management-2026: EMAT clinical policy guideline.Turkish journal of emergency medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionTransnasal humidified rapid-insufflation ventilatory exchange (THRIVE), if used for pre-oxygenation and apnoeic oxygenation, has the propensity to extend the safe apnoea time and thereby decrease the incidence of desaturation during rapid sequence induction (RSI) for emergency surgeries. Hence, we proposed to evaluate the comparative efficacy of pre-oxygenation with the use of conventional facemask breathing versus THRIVE during RSI in patients undergoing general anaesthesia (GA) for emergency surgeries. MATERIALS AND
methodsEighty patients undergoing RSI under GA for emergency abdominopelvic surgery were divided randomly into two groups. Patients were preoxygenated for three minutes with 100% oxygen via either a high-flow nasal cannula at a flow of 60 L/minute using THRIVE or a tightly-held, snuggly-fitting facemask at a flow of 12L/minute using a circle system. RSI was administered followed by laryngoscopy and endotracheal intubation. Arterial partial pressure of oxygen (PaO2) measured immediately after successful endotracheal intubation was our primary outcome. The lowest peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO2), apnoea time, number of attempts at laryngoscopy, use of any rescue manoeuvres, and any adverse event were also recorded. Data thus collected were statistically analysed.
resultsNo statistically significant difference in PaO2 value was observed after successful intubation, lowest SpO
conclusionWe conclude that though not superior to conventional facemasks, THRIVE is a safe, practicable, and efficient pre-oxygenation tool during RSI of GA for patients undergoing emergency surgeries.
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.