Aller au contenu principal
Accès ouvert déclaré 2022 review

High flow nasal cannula for patients undergoing bronchoscopy and gastrointestinal endoscopy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

31Citations signalées, ce qui n’est pas une note de qualité
2Institutions déclarées
1Pays d’affiliation déclarés

Rattachement africain : cn. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.

Le résumé fourni par la source

Background High flow nasal cannula is gaining increasingly used in patients undergoing endoscopic procedures. We undertook this systematic review and meta-analysis to determine whether high flow nasal cannula (HFNC) could effectively minimize the risk of hypoxemia as compared with conventional oxygen therapy (COT). Methods We performed a comprehensive search of Pubmed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Embase, and Web of Science. Studies involving the application of HFNC during endoscopic procedures were identified. Results We included 15 randomized controlled trials (7 bronchoscopy, 8 gastrointestinal endoscopy). Patients receiving HFNC during endoscopic procedures had a significantly lower risk of hypoxemia (defined as SpO 2 < 90%) versus COT group (risk ratio = 0.32; 95%CI (0.22–0.47), 13 studies, 4,093 patients, moderate-quality evidence, I 2 = 48.82%, P < 0.001). The lowest SpO 2 was significantly higher in HFNC group (mean difference = 4.41; 95%CI (2.95–5.86), 9 studies, 1,449 patients, moderate-quality evidence, I 2 = 81.17%, P < 0.001) than those receiving COT. No significant difference was detected between groups in end-procedure partial pressure of CO 2 (standard mean difference = −0.18; 95%CI (−0.52–0.15), 5 studies, 238 patients, moderate-quality evidence, I 2 = 42.25%, P = 0.29). Patients receiving HFNC were associated a lower need for airway intervention (risk ratio = 0.45; 95%CI (0.24–0.84), 8 studies, 2,872 patients, moderate-quality evidence, I 2 = 85.97%, P = 0.01) and less procedure interruption (risk ratio = 0.36; 95%CI (0.26–0.51), 6 studies, 1,562 patients, moderate-quality evidence, I 2 = 0.00%, P < 0.001). The overall intubation rate after endoscopy was 0.20% in both group, with no difference detected (risk ratio = 1.00; 95%CI (0.30–3.35), 7 studies, 2,943 patients, low-quality evidence, I 2 = 0.00%, P = 1.00). Conclusion This systematic review and meta-analysis found moderate to low evidence that the application of HFNC was associated with improved oxygenation, decreased need for airway intervention, and reduced procedure interruption in patients undergoing endoscopic procedures. Future larger sample and high-quality studies are warranted to confirm our result and further investigate the effectiveness of HFNC in patients at risk. Systematic Review Registration : https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/ , identifier: CRD42022298032.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.

Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert

DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.

Titre Crossref
High flow nasal cannula for patients undergoing bronchoscopy and gastrointestinal endoscopy: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Date Crossref
15/08/2022
Éditeur
Frontiers Media SA
Type
journal-article

Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.

Où se fait cette recherche

  • Zhengzhou University Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine pays non établi dans la notice
    Université ou école supérieure
  • Henan Provincial People's Hospital pays non établi dans la notice
    Établissement de santé

Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine — Zhengzhou University et Henan Provincial People's Hospital.

Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.

Les sujets associés

Airway Management and Intubation TechniquesTracheal and airway disordersRespiratory Support and Mechanisms

BNTIC News n’est pas le producteur de ces données. Les publications sont interrogées à la demande dans Crossref, OpenAIRE, DOAJ, Europe PMC, HAL, DataCite, AfricArXiv, ROR et la Banque mondiale, sans clé d’accès. OpenAlex reste optionnel. Aucun service payant n’est nécessaire et aucune donnée externe n’est enregistrée en base. Consulter les sources et leurs limites.