SynthesisBMC anesthesiology2026
Efficacy and safety of nasal mask compared to nasal cannula during procedural sedation in gastroscopy: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and trial sequential analysis.
Synthesis in BMC anesthesiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHypoxemia is the most common adverse event during propofol-based procedural sedation for gastroscopy. Conventional nasal cannula oxygenation provides low flow rates, permitting room air entrainment and often proving insufficient. Nasal mask oxygenation delivers higher inspired oxygen concentrations, potentially enhancing respiratory safety during sedation.
objectiveThis study compared the efficacy and safety of nasal mask versus nasal cannula oxygen delivery during propofol-based procedural sedation for gastroscopy.
methodsElectronic databases/registries were systematically searched from inception to January 24, 2026, for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Inclusion criteria encompassed adult patients undergoing propofol-based sedation for gastroscopy. The primary outcome was the incidence of hypoxemia. Secondary outcomes included severe hypoxemia, minimum oxygen saturation (SpO₂), need for airway or oxygenation interventions, procedure-related adverse events, and postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). Random-effects meta-analyses were performed using risk ratios (RRs) or mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Trial sequential analysis (TSA) assessed the sufficiency of the evidence. Risk of bias was evaluated using RoB 2, and certainty of evidence using GRADE.
resultsFive RCTs enrolled 1,267 patients, of whom 1,252 (98.8%) were included in the quantitative synthesis. Nasal mask oxygenation significantly reduced hypoxemia (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.58, p < 0.0001) and severe hypoxemia (RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.67, p = 0.0007) compared with nasal cannula. Nasal masks also decreased the need for jaw thrust (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.52) and mask-assisted ventilation (RR 0.16, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.46), while elevating minimum SpO₂ (MD 3.78, 95% CI 1.39 to 6.16). No significant differences emerged in coughing, hiccups, or PONV.
conclusionsNasal mask oxygenation is associated with greater respiratory safety compared with nasal cannula oxygenation during propofol-sedated gastroscopy. This advantage manifests as reduced incidence of hypoxemia and fewer airway-related interventions, alongside a comparable overall safety profile. PROSPERO: CRD420261291468.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42265608What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.