Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39777431›Full record

ArticlePloS one2025

Comparative evaluation of high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) and conventional oxygen therapy (COT) in infants after non-cardiac surgery: Study protocol of a randomized controlled trial.

Diwei Zhang, Tianqing Gong, Qinghua Huang, Qianqian Zhang, Kai Liu, Jia Li, Hai Yu, Yu Cui

Abstract readClinical Trial Protocol
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

8 authors.

Diwei ZhangDepartment of Anesthesiology, Chengdu Women's and Children's Central Hospital, School of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China.
Tianqing GongDepartment of Anesthesiology, Chengdu Women's and Children's Central Hospital, School of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China.
Qinghua HuangDepartment of Anesthesiology, Chengdu Women's and Children's Central Hospital, School of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China.
Qianqian ZhangDepartment of Anesthesiology, Chengdu Women's and Children's Central Hospital, School of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China.
Kai LiuDepartment of Anesthesiology, Chengdu Women's and Children's Central Hospital, School of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China.
Jia LiDepartment of Anesthesiology, Chengdu Women's and Children's Central Hospital, School of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China.
Hai YuDepartment of Anesthesiology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Yu CuiDepartment of Anesthesiology, Chengdu Women's and Children's Central Hospital, School of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China.ORCID 0000-0002-1481-9389

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLiterature regarding the advantages of HFNC in infants for ensuring oxygen supply after non-cardiac surgery is insufficient. The purpose of our study is to compare COT vs. HFNC on postoperative outcomes in infants undergoing non-cardiac surgery. We hypothesize that prophylactic use of HFNC after non-cardiac surgery in infants would reduce the incidence of post-anesthesia hypoxemia and could also be adapted as first-line oxygen therapy after non-cardiac surgery.

methodsThis is a superior, single-blind, randomized controlled study. A total of 394 infants undergoing general anesthesia will be randomly assigned to accept COT or HFNC in a 1:1 ratio. The primary outcome is the rate of desaturation post-extubation. Secondary outcomes include the rate of mild upper airway obstruction, the rate of severe respiratory depression, the rate of transfer to PICU, duration of oxygen therapy, length of PACU stay, the time to reach full enteral feeding, and postoperative adverse events, including nasal injury, agitation, vomiting, and unplanned secondary surgery related to the initial surgery. DISCUSSION: This is the first randomized controlled trial to explore the advantages of HFNC in infants to ensure oxygen supply after non-cardiac surgery. If favorable evidence is obtained, HFNC could be adopted as first-line oxygen therapy for infants following non-cardiac surgery.

trial registrationThe trial was registered at https://www.chictr.org.cn (Registration number: ChiCTR2400081600, Date: March 6, 2024).

Indexed as

CannulaOxygen Inhalation TherapyAnesthesia, GeneralFemaleHumansHypoxiaInfantInfant, NewbornMaleOxygenPostoperative ComplicationsRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSingle-Blind MethodOxygen

Identifiers

PMID39777431
PMCPMC11709249

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.