Trial reportBMC anesthesiology2026
Use of optiflow THRIVE high-flow nasal oxygen system versus a non-rebreather oxygen delivery device in patients with increased risk of airway obstruction in interventional radiology procedures: a randomized pilot study.
Trial report in BMC anesthesiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04171037 (A Pilot Study of FDA Approved Optiflow™ THRIVE Versus Standard Non-Rebreathers in Patients With Potential High Risk of Airway Obstruction During Total Intravenous Anesthesia), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
A Pilot Study of FDA Approved Optiflow™ THRIVE Versus Standard Non-Rebreathers in Patients With Potential High Risk of Airway Obstruction During Total Intravenous Anesthesia (TIVA) While Undergoing Interventional Radiology Procedures
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe configuration of interventional radiology (IR) suites often limits simultaneous access to the patient's airway and anesthesia equipment. This constraint may lead to suboptimal sedation in patients at increased risk of airway obstruction due to patient safety concerns. We conducted a randomized pilot trial to evaluate whether high-flow nasal oxygen (HFNO; F&P Optiflow™) reduces hypoxic events compared with a standard non-rebreather mask in this high-risk population undergoing deep sedation.
methodsPatients at increased risk of airway obstruction or hypoxia during deep sedation were randomized to receive 100% oxygen via HFNO at 70 L/min (HFNO group) or via non-rebreather mask at 8 L/min (standard-of-care [SoC] group). All patients received continuous intravenous propofol to achieve unconsciousness while maintaining spontaneous ventilation. The primary endpoint was total length of desaturation episodes [ToLDE], in minutes, defined as oxygen saturation [SpO
resultsA total of 101 patients were analyzed (HFNO group: n = 50; SoC group: n = 51). Mean ToLDE time was 0.34 min (median, 0; range 0-6.5 min) in the HFNO group and 0.97 min (median, 0; range 0-19.8 min) in the SoC group (P = 0.158). Desaturation occurred in 14% of HFNO patients vs. 26% of SoC patients (P = 0.212). The median number of BIS excursions was significantly higher in the SoC group (4; range, 0-19) than the HFNO group (2; range, 0-15; P = 0.005). Median PACU stay was shorter in the HFNO group (20 min; range, 0-60) vs. in the SOC group (26 min; range, 5-60) (P = 0.076). Patient-reported symptoms were less frequent and less severe in the HFNO group (12% vs. 16%).
conclusionsHFNO did not significantly reduce hypoxic events compared with a standard non-rebreather oxygen delivery device in patients at increased risk of airway obstruction during deep intravenous sedation. However, HFNO was associated with improved sedation stability and patient experience, supporting further investigation in larger studies.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT04171037; Date of original registration: November 19, 2019; This study was retrospectively registered. Study principal investigator: Gang Zheng; This manuscript adheres to the applicable Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) guidelines.
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.