Changes in Oxygen Saturation During Fiberoptic Bronchoscopy: High-Flow Nasal Cannula versus Standard Oxygen Therapy

Optimal flow of high-flow nasal cannula oxygenation to prevent desaturation during sedation for bronchoscopy: a randomized controlled study

BACKGROUND

Although high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) oxygenation is currently recommended to prevent desaturation during sedation for bronchoscopy, there is no consensus on an optimal flow rate.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the optimal oxygen flow rate for HFNC to effectively prevent desaturation during sedation for bronchoscopy.

DESIGN

Prospective, randomized, and controlled study.

METHODS

Patients (n = 240) scheduled for bronchoscopy were randomized to receive HFNC with propofol sedation (fraction of inspired oxygen, 100%) at one of six flow rates of 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, and 60 L/min, designated as groups 1-6, respectively.

RESULTS

The incidence of desaturation significantly decreased by increasing the oxygen flow rate (42.5%, 17.5%, 15%, 10%, 2.5%, and 0% for groups 1-6, respectively, p < 0.0001). The optimal oxygen flow rate for HFNC determined by probit regression to effectively prevent desaturation in 95% of patients was 43.20 (95% confidence interval, 36.43-55.96) L/min. The requirement for airway intervention was significantly decreased by increasing the oxygen flow rate.

CONCLUSION

An HFNC flow rate of 50-60 L/min is recommended to prevent desaturation during sedation for bronchoscopy.

REGISTRATION

NCT05298319 at ClinicalTrials.gov.

High-Flow Nasal Cannula Therapy as an Adjuvant Therapy for Respiratory Support during Endoscopic Techniques: A Narrative Review

High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) is a respiratory support technique that delivers a controlled concentration of oxygen with high flow, heat, and humidity via the nasal pathway. As it has many physiological effects, its use has increased for a variety of clinical indications; however, there is limited guidance on using HFNC as a respiratory support tool during endoscopic procedures. We conducted a narrative review to evaluate the effect of HFNC as an adjuvant tool during fiberoptic bronchoscopy (FOB), upper gastrointestinal tract endoscopy, and surgical procedures in adults. A search of the PubMed and Cochrane databases were performed. Approximately 384 publications were retrieved, and 99 were selected (93 original works and 6 case reports with a literature review). In patients who underwent FOB, HFNC appears to be superior to conventional oxygen therapy (COT) in preventing hypoxaemia. In contrast, for gastrointestinal endoscopy, the current evidence is insufficient to recommend HFNC over COT in a cost-effective manner. Finally, in surgical procedures such as laryngeal microsurgery or thoracic surgery, HFNC has been shown to be a safe and effective alternative to orotracheal intubation. As the results are heterogeneous, we advocate for the need for more quality studies to understand the effectiveness of HFNC during endoscopic procedures.

How to Write an Effective Discussion

Explaining the meaning of the results to the reader is the purpose of the discussion section of a research paper. There are elements of the discussion section that should be included and pitfalls that should be avoided. Always write the discussion section for the reader. Remember that the focus is to help the reader understand the study and that the focus should be on the study data.

The use of non-invasive respiratory assistance to facilitate bronchofiberoscopy performance in patients with hypoxemic (type one) respiratory failure - Study protocol

PURPOSE

Bronchofiberoscopy (FOB) is a procedure routinely performed for: lung cancer, obstruction, interstitial diseases, foreign bodies' removal, airway clearance, and hemoptysis. It causes acute airway narrowing leading to respiratory and cardiovascular stress. Due to increasing number of ill patients with respiratory failure (RF), conventional oxygen therapy (COT) is frequently insufficient to assure accurate oxygenation and prevent RF in patients requiring FOB. In this clinical scenario, patients may be intubated and supported with invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) with the specific aim of allowing a safe FOB. However, this invasive strategy is associated with an increased risk of IMV-associated complications.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Our study is a planned prospective multicenter three-arm randomized controlled trial (RCT). The target number of 300 patients was calculated based on the intubation risk in RF patients, which is 0.2-2%. The patients will be assigned to each arm based on Horowitz index. In each arm, the patients will be randomly assigned to one out of two dedicated respiratory support methods in each group i.e. COT/high flow nasal cannula (HFNC), HFNC/non-invasive ventilation (NIV) and NIV/IMV. In the manuscript the current state of art in the area of respiratory support is discussed. We have underlined knowledge gaps in medical evidence which we are planning to reveal with our results.

RESULTS

The results of our study are clinically crucial, because they address current gaps concerning COT/HFNC/NIV/IMV.

CONCLUSION

The expected findings of this study would allow for careful selection of respiratory support method to safely perform FOB in patients with hypoxemic RF.