Publication: High flow versus conventional nasal cannula for oxygenation and ventilation maintenance during surgery with intravenous deep sedation by propofol: a randomized controlled study
Issued Date
2021-12-01
Resource Type
ISSN
14712253
Other identifier(s)
2-s2.0-85114365000
Rights
Mahidol University
Rights Holder(s)
SCOPUS
Bibliographic Citation
BMC Anesthesiology. Vol.21, No.1 (2021)
Suggested Citation
Amorn Vijitpavan, Yanin Kooncharoensuk High flow versus conventional nasal cannula for oxygenation and ventilation maintenance during surgery with intravenous deep sedation by propofol: a randomized controlled study. BMC Anesthesiology. Vol.21, No.1 (2021). doi:10.1186/s12871-021-01432-4 Retrieved from: https://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/20.500.14594/77536
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Authors
Journal Issue
Thesis
Title
High flow versus conventional nasal cannula for oxygenation and ventilation maintenance during surgery with intravenous deep sedation by propofol: a randomized controlled study
Author(s)
Other Contributor(s)
Abstract
Background: The dead space washout and provision of some level of positive airway pressure by nasal high-flow (NHF) cannula could improve the efficiency of ventilation, oxygenation and maintenance of the upper airway in patients undergoing deep sedation. This study aimed to compare the incidences of events represented oxygenation and ventilation, i.e. desaturation and upper airway obstruction, and arterial blood gas (ABG) levels between using NHF cannula and conventional nasal cannula (NC2) during deep sedation of adult surgical patients. Methods: In this prospective randomized single-blinded study, the patients who were 20–80 years old, ASA physical status of 1 to 3, scheduled for surgery under intravenous sedation (IVS) were included. The patients were randomly divided into two groups, i.e., NC2 or NHF groups. Propofol infusion was given to maintain deep sedation. The desaturation (SpO2 < 92%) and upper airway obstruction events (presence of snoring with paradoxical breathing) after application of NC2 or NHF were observed and collected. Other outcomes included interventions during IVS, such as jaw lifting or airway instrument insertion, mouth dryness, and post- ABG analyses were also collected and compared. Results: Thirty-six patients undergoing endovascular surgery were randomized into NC2 or NHF groups (18 in each group). No patients dropped out of the study. There were no significant differences in age, sex, ASA physical status, pre-sedation and pre-application of NC2 and NHF ABG analyses (PaO2, SaO2, pH, PaCO2, and PaO2/FiO2). NHF group had significantly lower in the incidence of desaturation [5 (27.78%) vs 13 (72.22%), p = 0.008], upper airway obstruction [4 (22.22%) vs 13 (72.22%), p = 0.003], and airway maneuver [6 (33.33%) vs 13 (72.22%), p = 0.019] than NC2 group. There were no differences in the ABG analyses after oxygen supplementation and no significant differences in mouth dryness between groups. Conclusion: The use of NHF cannula in patients undergoing endovascular surgery under deep sedation reduced desaturation events and required fewer airway interventions than NC2 with no difference in arterial blood gas analyses and mouth dryness.