Mode
Text Size
Log in / Sign up
N/A N=60 Randomized Treatment

Nasopharyngeal Versus Nasal Cannula Oxygen Supplementation in Surgery Patients

Oxygen Administration During Deep Sedation

Enrolled (actual)
60
Serious AEs
0.0%
Results posted
Jun 2017
Primary outcome: Primary: Number of Participants With Oxygen Saturations Below 92% — 3; 12 Participants

Study Design & Population

Study type
Interventional
Phase
N/A
Interventions
Nasopharyngeal catheter (Device); Nasal Cannula (Device); Oxygen Supplementation (Procedure); Sedation (Procedure)
Age
Pediatric, Adult, Older Adult · 16+ yrs
Sex
All
Sponsor
Vanderbilt University
Primary completion
Dec 2015

Outcome Measures

OutcomeResultp-value
PRIMARY
Number of Participants With Oxygen Saturations Below 92%
3; 12
SECONDARY
Number of Participants Who Needed Airway Assistance Interventions
4; 17

Summary

The investigators plan to conduct a randomized, controlled trial comparing nasopharyngeal oxygen supplementation to traditional nasal cannula in patients undergoing oral surgery under moderate sedation.

Eligibility Criteria

Inclusion Criteria

  • Patients greater than 16 years of age
  • Patients who present for oral surgery or esophagoduodenography and colonoscopy
  • Patients who undergo intravenous sedation

Exclusion Criteria

  • Patients who require endotracheal intubation
  • ASA class 4 or higher
  • Existing esophageal disease such as a perforation or varices
View full record on ClinicalTrials.gov →

Data sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02219464). Outcome figures and adverse-event rates are extracted automatically from the registry's posted results and are provided for clinician reference, not as a substitute for the primary publication.

Back to search