Frontiers in Medicine (Jun 2024)

A meta-analysis of the effects of transnasal high-flow oxygen therapy in gastrointestinal endoscopy

  • Wei Chen,
  • Shaoyong Ma,
  • Lili Jiang,
  • Jingwen Wang,
  • Liping Yuan,
  • Yingying Wang

DOI
https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2024.1419635
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 11

Abstract

Read online

PurposeThis study aimed to systematically evaluate the clinical effects of using transnasal high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) and conventional oxygen therapy (COT) in patients undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy.MethodsA comprehensive literature search was conducted from 2004 to April 2024 to collect relevant studies on the application of HFNC in patients undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy. Multiple Chinese and English databases, including China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang Data, Web of Science, PubMed, and Cochrane Library, were searched systematically for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Two researchers independently screened the literature, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias in the included studies. RevMan 5.4 software was utilized for conducting the network meta-analysis.ResultsA total of 12 RCTs involving 3,726 patients were included. Meta-analysis results showed that HFNC reduced the incidence of hypoxemia and improved the minimum oxygen saturation (SpO2) compared with COT [odds ratio (OR) = 0.39, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.29–0.53], [mean difference (MD) = 4.07, 95% CI: 3.14–5.01], and the difference was statistically significant. However, the baseline SpO2 levels and incidence of hypercapnia were not statistically significantly different between the HFNC and COT groups [MD = −0.21, 95% CI: −0.49–0.07]; [OR = 1.43, 95% CI: 0.95–2.15]. In terms of procedure time, the difference between HFNC and COT was not statistically significant, and subgroup analyses were performed for the different types of studies, with standard deviation in the gastroscopy group (MD = 0.09, 95% CI: −0.07–0.24) and the endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography group (MD = 0.36, 95% CI: −0.50–1.23). The results demonstrated a significant reduction in the adoption of airway interventions in the HFNC group compared to the COT group (OR = 0.16, 95% CI: 0.05–0.53), with a statistically significant difference; this result was consistent with those of the included studies.ConclusionThe application of HFNC improves the incidence of hypoxemia, enhances oxygenation, and reduces airway interventions during gastrointestinal endoscopy. However, HFNC does not significantly affect baseline SpO2, hypercapnia, or procedure time. The limitations of this study must be acknowledged, and further high-quality studies should be conducted to validate these findings.

Keywords