T W McCain1, D P Dunagan, N E Adair, R Chin. 1. Department of Internal Medicine, Section of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA.
Abstract
STUDY OBJECTIVES: To determine the optimal method of delivering supplemental oxygen during flexible bronchoscopy (FB). DESIGN: Prospective study. SETTING:University medical center. PATIENTS: Ninety-seven consecutive patients undergoing outpatient nasal FB during a 7-month period. INTERVENTION: During FB, delivery of oxygen was alternated weekly and administered by nasal cannula either nasally (52 patients) or orally (45 patients). Prior to the procedure, patients completed a questionnaire regarding oral or nasal breathing preferences, history of sinus disease, allergy history, and perceived degree of nasal congestion. RESULTS: Comparison of oxygen delivery groups demonstrated no significant difference in oxygen requirements (4.1 L/min nasal vs 3.8 L/min oral, p = 0.63), overall saturation nadir (90.9% nasal vs 91.4% oral, p = 0.85), or average saturation (95.8% nasal vs 95.7% oral, p = 0.57). No correlation between subjective symptoms or sinus or allergy history was found for oxygen requirements, average saturation, or saturation nadir. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that during nasal FB, no discernible difference exists between administration of oxygen using cannulas placed either nasally or orally.
RCT Entities:
STUDY OBJECTIVES: To determine the optimal method of delivering supplemental oxygen during flexible bronchoscopy (FB). DESIGN: Prospective study. SETTING: University medical center. PATIENTS: Ninety-seven consecutive patients undergoing outpatient nasal FB during a 7-month period. INTERVENTION: During FB, delivery of oxygen was alternated weekly and administered by nasal cannula either nasally (52 patients) or orally (45 patients). Prior to the procedure, patients completed a questionnaire regarding oral or nasal breathing preferences, history of sinus disease, allergy history, and perceived degree of nasal congestion. RESULTS: Comparison of oxygen delivery groups demonstrated no significant difference in oxygen requirements (4.1 L/min nasal vs 3.8 L/min oral, p = 0.63), overall saturation nadir (90.9% nasal vs 91.4% oral, p = 0.85), or average saturation (95.8% nasal vs 95.7% oral, p = 0.57). No correlation between subjective symptoms or sinus or allergy history was found for oxygen requirements, average saturation, or saturation nadir. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that during nasal FB, no discernible difference exists between administration of oxygen using cannulas placed either nasally or orally.