Perioperative medicine & outcomes
Prophylactic high-flow nasal oxygen vs. conventional oxygen for prevention of postoperative respiratory complications: a randomized trial
Primary result · PPC severityResult — go to the resultOrdinal OR 0.50 95% CI 0.28–0.91Authors' conclusion
In older adults undergoing lung resection, prophylactic HFNC reduced in-hospital PPC burden and was associated with more favorable early postoperative respiratory recovery.
Study context
- Population
- Patients undergoing video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) lobectomy or segmentectomy for stage I-IIIa non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)modified ITT analysis
- Participants
- 210 patients
- Comparison
- Prophylactic high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) vs conventional oxygen therapy after extubation
- HFNCn = 104
- Conventional oxygen therapy (COT)n = 106reference
- Primary endpoint
- PPC severity (ordinal logistic regression)
- Follow-up
- During hospitalization
Methodological detailssingle-centre, open-label
- Single-centre
- Open-label
Primary result
PPC severity
Ordinal OR
0.50
95% CI 0.28–0.91
P = 0.022
HFNC vs COT
ordinal OR 0.50 (95% CI 0.28–0.91); P = 0.022
As reported in the abstract
Secondary outcomes
| Outcome | HFNC | COT | Absolute risk difference (95% CI) | P value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moderate-to-severe (clinically relevant, grade ≥ 2) PPCs | 23.1% | 39.6% | −15.6% (−28.0% to −3.2%) | P = 0.010 | |
| −40−20020Difference (linear scale) |
Early postoperative respiratory symptoms and symptom-related functional interference
- Secondary analyses suggested improvements with HFNC
Physiological outcomes and LOS
- No differences observed
Original publication
Prophylactic high-flow nasal oxygen vs. conventional oxygen for prevention of postoperative respiratory complications: a randomized trial. Crit Care. Published 20 August 2026. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →