ArticleSaudi journal of anaesthesia
Comparative efficacy of high-flow nasal cannula versus conventional oxygen delivery during procedural sedation for ovum pickup in assisted reproductive technology.
Article in Saudi journal of anaesthesia. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Procedural sedation during ovum pickup (OPU) is often associated with transient hypoxemia and airway interventions. High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) therapy may improve oxygenation during sedated procedures, but evidence in assisted reproductive techniques remains limited. This study compares HFNC with conventional low-flow oxygen (CFO) in maintaining oxygenation during OPU. Materials and Methods: In this randomized controlled trial, 220 women undergoing OPU under propofol sedation were allocated to either CFO (Group C; Results: Hemodynamic and respiratory parameters remained stable and comparable between groups throughout the procedure and recovery. Desaturation events were more frequent in Group C ( Conclusion: HFNC provides a safe and effective alternative to CFO therapy during procedural sedation for OPU, significantly reducing the need for oxygen escalation without affecting hemodynamic stability, sedation depth, or recovery. Its routine use may enhance respiratory safety in sedated reproductive procedures.
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.