Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40295669›Full record

Trial reportScientific reports2025

A randomized controlled trial of nasal airway ventilation technique in edentulous patients during anesthesia induction.

Ling-Ling Wang, Xiao-Guang Guo, Yang Li, Fu-Shan Xue, Jian-Jun Yang

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Scientific reports, 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

5 authors.

Ling-Ling WangDepartment of Anesthesiology, Pain and Perioperative Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou City, Henan Province, People's Republic of China.
Xiao-Guang GuoDepartment of Anesthesiology, Pain and Perioperative Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou City, Henan Province, People's Republic of China.
Yang LiDepartment of Anesthesiology, Pain and Perioperative Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou City, Henan Province, People's Republic of China.
Fu-Shan XueDepartment of Anesthesiology, Shengli Clinical Medical College of Fujian Medical University, Fujian Provincial Hospital, Fuzhou University Affiliated Provincial Hospital, Fuzhou City, Fujian Province, People's Republic of China.
Jian-Jun YangDepartment of Anesthesiology, Pain and Perioperative Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou City, Henan Province, People's Republic of China. yjyangjj@126.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Edentulous patients often experience difficult facemask ventilation during anesthesia induction, primarily due to inadequate facemask seal and air leakage. This randomized trial was designed to determine the efficacy and safety of an alternative ventilation strategy, namely the nasal airway ventilation technique, which involves the use of a nasal airway and a modified ventilation maneuver during anesthesia induction in edentulous patients. Eighty edentulous patients who underwent elective surgery with general anesthesia were randomly assigned to the nasal airway or facemask group. In the nasal airway group, a nasal airway was inserted and connected to the anesthesia ventilator, after which the mouth and nostrils were closed. In the facemask group, moistened gauzes were used to improve the facemask seal against hollow cheeks and the "VE-clamp" technique was applied for facemask ventilation. The primary outcome was the expired tidal volume during anesthesia induction. The expired tidal volume during anesthesia induction was significantly increased in the nasal airway group (median 5.6 mL/kg, interquartile range 5.0-5.9), compared with the facemask group (median 3.6 mL/kg, interquartile range 2.6-4.5), with a median difference of 1.9 mL/kg (95% confidence interval, 1.4 to 2.3; P < 0.001). A higher incidence of successful ventilation by a single anesthetist is observed in the nasal airway group than in the facemask group during anesthesia induction (100 vs. 82.5%; P = 0.018). There was no significant difference in the incidence of adverse events between groups. Our findings demonstrated that the nasal airway ventilation technique significantly and safely improved ventilation during anesthesia induction in edentulous patients. Thus, this technique can serve as a valuable alternative when facemask ventilation is inadequate in these patients.

Indexed as

Anesthesia, GeneralMouth, EdentulousRespiration, ArtificialAdultAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedTidal VolumeAnesthesia inductionDifficult facemask ventilationEdentulous patientsElderlyNasal airway

Identifiers

PMID40295669
PMCPMC12037785

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.