Abstract
Background
Procedural sedation reduces patients’ discomfort and anxiety, facilitating performance of the examination and intervention. However, it may also cause adverse events, including airway obstruction and hypoxia. We conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of high-flow nasal oxygenation (HFNO) compared with that of standard oxygen therapy in adult patients undergoing procedural sedation.
Methods
We identified randomized controlled trials published before November 2020 based on PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases and ClinicalTrials.gov registry. Intraprocedural desaturation [peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO2) < 90%] was evaluated as the primary outcome. The secondary outcomes were the lowest SpO2, need for airway intervention, oxygen therapy-related complications, and patient, operator, and anesthetist’s satisfaction.
Results
Six trials with a total of 2633 patients were reviewed. Patients using HFNO compared with standard oxygen therapy had a significantly lower risk of intraprocedural desaturation [risk ratio 0.18, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.04-0.87]. The lowest intraprocedural SpO2 in HFNO group was significantly higher than that in standard oxygen therapy group (mean difference 4.19%, 95% CI 1.74-6.65).
Conclusions
Compared with standard oxygen therapy, HFNO may reduce the risk of desaturation and increase the lowest SpO2 in adult patients undergoing sedation for medical procedures.
High-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy versus conventional oxygen therapy in patients with acute respiratory failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
