Evidence Hub

Impact of early high flow nasal oxygen on diaphragmatic function and pulmonary complications after thoracic surgery: A randomized clinical trial

A. Fogagnolo, Salvatore Grasso, M. Dres, D. Azzolina, F. Dalla Corte, Giampiero Dolci, N. Tamburini, G. de Paoli et al.

Journal of clinical anesthesia, 2025

116 participants · 9 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) are common after thoracic surgery, particularly in patients that develop postoperative diaphragmatic dysfunction. High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) oxygen therapy decreases postoperative work of breathing and provides a positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) effect. As a result, it may decrease the occurrence of diaphragmatic dysfunction and PPCs after thoracic surgery.

METHODS

Single-centre, open-label, randomized controlled trial. Patients undergoing video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy were randomized to receive conventional oxygen therapy (COT) or high flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy. In both groups, inspiratory oxygen fraction was titrated to reach a peripheral oxygen saturation of >94 %. Diaphragmatic displacement (DD) and diaphragmatic thickening fraction (TF%) were measured 2 and 24 h after surgery. Diaphragmatic dysfunction was identified by DD <10 mm. PPCs occurring within 7 days after study enrollment were recorded.

RESULTS

We analyzed 116 patients in the study. Postoperative diaphragmatic dysfunction occurred in 17/58 patients (29 %) in the HFNC group compared to 21/58 (36 %) in the COT group (p = 0.55). The rate of PPCs was similar between the two groups: 32/58 (55 %) in the HFNC group and 37/58 (64 %) in the COT group (p = 0.449). Patients who developed postoperative diaphragmatic dysfunction experienced fewer PPCs when treated with HFNC (20/37; 54 %) compared to COT (17/21; 81 %) (p = 0.037). A post hoc…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 116 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free