Trial reportJAMA network open2026
High-Flow Nasal Oxygen Therapy After Cardiac Surgery: A Randomized Clinical Trial.
Trial report in JAMA network open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- High-flow nasal oxygen in the perioperative period: Enough evidence, or questions still unanswered?Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
42 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: High-flow nasal oxygen therapy (HFNOT) is used for noninvasive respiratory support following cardiac surgery despite uncertainty about its clinical effectiveness or associated costs. Objective: To determine whether prophylactic HFNOT in patients at increased risk of respiratory complications following cardiac surgery has clinical benefits compared with standard oxygen therapy (SOT). Design, Setting, and Participants: This adaptive, parallel group, randomized clinical trial collected and analyzed data from 17 cardiac surgery centers in 3 countries between October 7, 2020, and June 19, 2024. Eligible participants included adults undergoing nonemergent cardiac surgery with any of the following risk factors for pulmonary complications: chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, asthma, lower respiratory tract infection in the last 4 weeks, a body mass index of 35 or greater, or currently or recently smoking for longer than 10 pack-years. Outcome assessors were blinded. A preplanned sample size re-estimation was conducted after 300 participants completed the 90-day follow-up. Intervention: Participants were randomized at a 1:1 ratio with concealed allocation to HFNOT or SOT administered for at least 16 hours immediately after postoperative extubation. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary effectiveness outcome was days alive and at home (DAH) without increased support compared with baseline in the first 90 days (DAH90). Any day of increased support, including at home, would provide a value of 0 for that day. Secondary outcomes included DAH90 without considering the additional support component. Results: A total of 1280 patients were recruited (mean [SD] age, 62.9 [10.5] years; 892 [69.7%] men; 640 in each group), of whom 1224 (95.6%) had complete DAH90 data. The primary outcome of median DAH90 was 0 (IQR, 0-79) for the HFNOT group and 0 (IQR, 0-87) for the SOT group (median difference, 0 [95% CI, 0-0]; P = .75). Secondary clinical outcomes, including DAH90 without considering whether additional support was required, were similar between groups. Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial of HFNOT in patients at increased risk of postoperative pulmonary complications after nonemergent cardiac surgery, HFNOT did not improve DAH90 without increased support. These findings do not support the implementation of routine prophylactic HFNOT after cardiac surgery. Trial Registration: isrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN14092678.
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.