Journal of cardiothoracic and vascular anesthesia · 2021
Comparison of High-Flow Humidified Oxygen With Conventional Continuous Positive Airway Pressure in Nonventilated Lungs During Thoracic Surgery: A Randomized Cross-Over Study.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Sawasdiwipachai Prasert, Weerayutwattana Ratchaya, Thongcharoen Punnarerk, Suksompong Sirilak
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: This study assessed the efficacy of high-flow humidified oxygen (HFHO) as an alternative to continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) for improving oxygenation while preserving nonventilated lung collapse during one-lung ventilation.
DESIGN: A prospective randomized cross-over trial.
SETTING: A tertiary medical center.
PARTICIPANTS: The study comprised 28 patients undergoing elective thoracotomy with one-lung ventilation using a double-lumen endobronchial tube placement.
INTERVENTIONS: The patients received prophylactic CPAP or HFHO to the nonventilated lung for 20 minutes and were then crossedover to the other oxygenation modality for 20 minutes, with a 20-minute recovery interval between the two modalities.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Changes in respiratory parameters and lung deflation quality were recorded. Both CPAP and HFHO increased the partial pressure of arterial oxygen in either sequence in both groups, ranging from 31.8-to-66.0 mmHg. However, the increments from these two interventions were not statistically significant (95% confidence interval -12.84 to 21.87; p = 0.597). There were no differences in other parameters. Half the patients receiving CPAP experienced worsening of the surgical condition, whereas the HFHO patients experienced no change or reported a better lung deflation (p < 0.001).
CONCLUSION: HFHO could be an alternative method to CPAP for improving arterial oxygenation while preserving lung deflation during one-lung ventilation. However, additional studies are warranted in regard to its cost-effectiveness and establishment as a routine treatment.
DESIGN: A prospective randomized cross-over trial.
SETTING: A tertiary medical center.
PARTICIPANTS: The study comprised 28 patients undergoing elective thoracotomy with one-lung ventilation using a double-lumen endobronchial tube placement.
INTERVENTIONS: The patients received prophylactic CPAP or HFHO to the nonventilated lung for 20 minutes and were then crossedover to the other oxygenation modality for 20 minutes, with a 20-minute recovery interval between the two modalities.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Changes in respiratory parameters and lung deflation quality were recorded. Both CPAP and HFHO increased the partial pressure of arterial oxygen in either sequence in both groups, ranging from 31.8-to-66.0 mmHg. However, the increments from these two interventions were not statistically significant (95% confidence interval -12.84 to 21.87; p = 0.597). There were no differences in other parameters. Half the patients receiving CPAP experienced worsening of the surgical condition, whereas the HFHO patients experienced no change or reported a better lung deflation (p < 0.001).
CONCLUSION: HFHO could be an alternative method to CPAP for improving arterial oxygenation while preserving lung deflation during one-lung ventilation. However, additional studies are warranted in regard to its cost-effectiveness and establishment as a routine treatment.