High-flow versus standard nasal cannula in morbidly obese patients during colonoscopy: A prospective, randomized clinical trial

Riccio, Christina A.; Sarmiento, Stephen; Minhajuddin, Abu; Nasir, Dawood; Fox, Amanda A.

doi:10.1016/j.jclinane.2018.10.026

Cited by 82 publications

(159 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

149

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…2709not reflect actual amount of oxygen that was inspired by the patients during both modes of respiratory support. Nevertheless, our data are in line with a recent finding by Riccio et al16 who could not observe less arterial oxygen desaturations in obese patients undergoing procedural sedation for colonoscopy when comparing HFNC and LFNC at similar FiO 2 . We therefore conclude that the inherent properties of HFNC as discussed above may not increase respiratory stability during short procedural sedations.We tested our hypothesis in pulmonary healthy children without preexisting pulmonary impairment at the time of the intervention.…”

supporting

confidence: 93%

High‐flow nasal cannula vs standard respiratory care in pediatric procedural sedation: A randomized controlled pilot trial

Klotz

Baumgartner

Teufel

2020

Pediatric Pulmonology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction Respiratory instability is frequently observed during pediatric procedural sedation. The aim of this trial was to estimate the impact of high‐flow nasal cannula (HFNC) therapy on respiratory stability during sedation for upper gastrointestinal tract endoscopy in children. Methods Prospective randomized controlled non‐blinded single‐center pilot trial. Children were randomly allocated to receive either HFNC (2 L/kg/min) or low‐flow nasal oxygen cannula (LFNC, standard care). FiO2 was titrated to maintain SpO2 94% to 98% in both groups. Primary outcome was the number of events of respiratory instability defined by prespecified criteria (hypoxia, hypercapnia, apnea). Secondary outcomes included type and duration of events, number of interventions to regain respiratory stability and cumulative doses of medication. Results Fifty children (mean age, 12.3 ± 3.1 years) were enrolled and treated with HFNC (n = 25) or LFNC (n = 25). Patient and intervention characteristics were not different in the two study groups, including total oxygen flow rate. Mean (SD) number of respiratory events in the HFNC group was 2.0 ± 1.9 events compared to 2.0 ± 1.4 events in the LFNC group (P = .65; 95% CI of difference, −1.0 to 1.0). There was no difference for any secondary outcome criteria, percentage of patients for any outcome criteria and no difference in the number of respiratory events or airway management maneuvers per patient between treatment groups. Conclusions HFNC did not increase respiratory stability in sedated children undergoing upper gastrointestinal tract endoscopy compared to LFNC.

show abstract

supporting

confidence: 93%

High‐flow nasal cannula vs standard respiratory care in pediatric procedural sedation: A randomized controlled pilot trial

Klotz

Baumgartner

Teufel

2020

Pediatric Pulmonology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In total, there have been 6 RCTs completed, with 3 during bronchoscopy and 3 during esophagogastroduodenoscopy (Table 4). 7,10,[13][14][15]41 HFNC has been reported to be less effective than NIV 10,13,41 but to be superior to O 2 therapy 7,14,15 in maintaining oxygenation during endoscopic examination. In the 3 RCTs with nonhypoxemic subjects, it should be noted that the HFNC F IO 2 was set at 1.0 with flow at 30-60 L/min.…”

Section: Breathing Support During Endoscopymentioning

confidence: 99%

Year in Review 2019: High-Flow Nasal Cannula Oxygen Therapy for Adult Subjects

Jing

Scott

2020

Respir Care

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This single-centre trial in morbidly obese patients was stopped for futility. At similar FiO 2 (36%–40% at 60 L/min in HFNO group vs O 2 flow of 4 L/min in SOT group), HFNO did not reduce the rate of hypoxaemia (39.3% vs 45.2%, respectively, p=0.79) 46. However, there was a trend favouring HFNO in patients at risk of sleep apnoea syndrome.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 82%

High-flow nasal oxygenation versus standard oxygenation for gastrointestinal endoscopy with sedation. The prospective multicentre randomised controlled ODEPHI study protocol

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionHypoxaemia is a major complication during gastrointestinal endoscopy (GIE) procedures (upper/lower) when performed under deep sedation in the procedure room. Standard oxygen therapy (SOT) is used to prevent hypoxaemia. Data suggest that risk factors for hypoxaemia under deep sedation during GIE are obstructive sleep apnoea syndrome, a body mass index above 30 kg/m², high blood pressure, diabetes, heart disease, age over 60 years old, high American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status class and the association of upper and lower GIE. High-flow nasal oxygenation (HFNO) may potentially improve oxygenation during GIE under deep sedation. We hypothesised that HFNO could decrease the incidence of hypoxaemia in comparison with SOT.Methods and analysisThe ODEPHI (High-flow nasaloxygenation versus standardoxygenation for gastrointestinalendoscopy withsedation. The prospective multicentre randomised controlled) study is a multicentre randomised controlled trial comparing HFNO to SOT during GIE (upper and/or lower) under deep sedation administered by anaesthesiologists in the procedure room. Three hundred and eighty patients will be randomised with a 1:1 ratio in two parallel groups.The primary outcome is the occurrence of hypoxaemia, defined by a pulse oximetry measurement of peripheral capillary oxygen saturation (SpO2) below or equal to 92% during the GIE procedure. Secondary outcomes include prolonged hypoxaemia, severe hypoxaemia, need for manoeuvres to maintain upper airway patency and other adverse events.Ethics and disseminationThis study has been approved by the ethics committee (CPP Sud Est Paris V, France), and patients are included after informed consent. The results will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals. As provided for by French law, patients participating in the study are informed that they have the possibility to ask the investigators, once the study is completed, to be informed of the overall results of the study. Thus, a summary of the results will be sent by post to the participants on request.Trial registration numberClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT03829293).

show abstract

High-flow versus standard nasal cannula in morbidly obese patients during colonoscopy: A prospective, randomized clinical trial

Cited by 82 publications

References 36 publications

High‐flow nasal cannula vs standard respiratory care in pediatric procedural sedation: A randomized controlled pilot trial

High‐flow nasal cannula vs standard respiratory care in pediatric procedural sedation: A randomized controlled pilot trial

Year in Review 2019: High-Flow Nasal Cannula Oxygen Therapy for Adult Subjects

High-flow nasal oxygenation versus standard oxygenation for gastrointestinal endoscopy with sedation. The prospective multicentre randomised controlled ODEPHI study protocol

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About