Department of Anaesthesia, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Woodville, Adelaide, SA, Australia.
Discipline of Acute Care Medicine, University of Adelaide, SA, Australia.
Anaesthesia. 2023 Jan;78(1):81-92. doi: 10.1111/anae.15845. Epub 2022 Aug 31.
We conducted a systematic review to evaluate the effect of high-flow nasal oxygen and conventional oxygen therapy during procedural sedation amongst adults and children. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL for randomised controlled trials that reported the effects of high-flow nasal oxygen during procedural sedation. The primary outcome measure was hypoxaemia and the secondary outcomes were minimum oxygen saturation; hypercarbia; requirement for airway manoeuvres; and procedure interruptions. The quality of evidence was assessed using the revised Cochrane risk-of bias tool and grading of recommendations, assessment, development and evaluation (GRADE). Nineteen randomised controlled trials (4121 patients) including three in children were included. Administration of high-flow nasal oxygen reduced hypoxaemia, risk ratio (95%CI) 0.37 (0.24-0.56), p < 0.001; minor airway manoeuvre requirements, risk ratio (95%CI) 0.26 (0.11-0.59), p < 0.001; procedural interruptions, risk ratio (95%CI) 0.17 (0.05-0.53), p = 0.002; and increased minimum oxygen saturation, mean difference (95%CI) 4.1 (2.70-5.50), p < 0.001; as compared with the control group. High-flow nasal oxygen had no impact on hypercarbia, risk ratio (95%CI) 1.24 (0.97-1.58), p = 0.09, I = 0%. High-flow nasal oxygen reduced the incidence of hypoxaemia regardless of the procedure involved, degree of fractional inspired oxygen, risk-profile of patients and mode of propofol administration. The evidence was ascertained as moderate for all outcomes except for procedure interruptions. In summary, high-flow nasal oxygen compared with conventional oxygenation techniques reduced the risk of hypoxaemia, increased minimum oxygen saturation and reduced the requirement for airway manoeuvres. High-flow nasal oxygen should be considered in patients at risk of hypoxaemia during procedural sedation.
我们进行了一项系统评价,以评估高流量鼻氧和常规氧疗在成人和儿童程序镇静期间的效果。我们检索了 MEDLINE、EMBASE 和 CINAHL,以查找报告高流量鼻氧在程序镇静期间效果的随机对照试验。主要结局指标为低氧血症,次要结局指标为最低氧饱和度;高碳酸血症;需要气道操作;以及程序中断。使用修订后的 Cochrane 偏倚风险工具和建议、评估、开发和评估(GRADE)对证据质量进行评估。纳入了 19 项随机对照试验(4121 例患者),其中包括 3 项儿童研究。高流量鼻氧治疗可降低低氧血症,风险比(95%CI)为 0.37(0.24-0.56),p<0.001;需要进行较小的气道操作,风险比(95%CI)为 0.26(0.11-0.59),p<0.001;程序中断,风险比(95%CI)为 0.17(0.05-0.53),p=0.002;最低氧饱和度增加,平均差异(95%CI)为 4.1(2.70-5.50),p<0.001;与对照组相比。高流量鼻氧对高碳酸血症没有影响,风险比(95%CI)为 1.24(0.97-1.58),p=0.09,I²=0%。高流量鼻氧降低低氧血症的发生率,与所涉及的程序、吸入氧分数、患者风险状况和丙泊酚给药方式无关。除了程序中断外,所有结局的证据均为中等质量。总之,与常规氧合技术相比,高流量鼻氧降低了低氧血症的风险,增加了最低氧饱和度,减少了气道操作的需求。在程序镇静期间有低氧血症风险的患者中,应考虑使用高流量鼻氧。