ArticleIntensive care medicine2011
Comparison of the effects of two humidifier systems on endotracheal tube resistance.
Article in Intensive care medicine, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- Heat and moisture exchangers (HMEs) and heated humidifiers (HHs) in adult critically ill patients: a systematic review, meta-analysis and meta-regression of randomized controlled trials.Critical care (London, England) · 2017Pooled it
- Towards Zero Endotracheal Tube Occlusion: A Reevaluation of Passive Humidifiers Testing and Selection.American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine · 2025Article
- Evaluation of the Humidification Performances of New Generation of Heated Wire Humidifiers.Respiratory care · 2024Article
- How to avoid an epidemic of endotracheal tube occlusion.The Lancet. Respiratory medicine · 2021Article
- Observational
- End-inspiratory pause prolongation in acute respiratory distress syndrome patients: effects on gas exchange and mechanics.Annals of intensive care · 2016Article
- [Non-invasive and invasive out of hospital ventilation in chronic respiratory failure : Consensus report of the working group on ventilation and intensive care medicine of the Austrian Society of Pneumology].Wiener klinische Wochenschrift · 2016Article
- Year in review in Intensive Care Medicine 2011: III. ARDS and ECMO, weaning, mechanical ventilation, noninvasive ventilation, pediatrics and miscellanea.Intensive care medicine · 2012Review
- Comparison of the effects of two humidifier systems on endotracheal tube resistance.Intensive care medicine · 2011Article
- Humidification during mechanical ventilation to prevent endotracheal tube occlusion in critically ill patients: A case control study.Annals of thoracic medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare the effects of two humidifier systems on endotracheal tube (ETT) resistance during mechanical ventilation, either an active heated humidifier (HH) or a passive heat and moisture exchanger (HME) was selected using current clinical recommendations.
methodsThis was a prospective clinical cohort study performed in an intensive care unit. Gas conditioning was performed using the HH in 22 patients and the HME in another 22. Patients were matched for endotracheal tube diameter, days of mechanical ventilation, simplified acute physiology score II (SAPS II), and fluid balance.
resultsUsed-ETT resistance was measured immediately after extubation. Unused-ETT resistance was calculated with an identical, clean ETT. No differences were found between the HH and HME groups in ETT diameter (7.9 ± 0.4 vs. 7.9 ± 0.3 mm; p = 0.98), days of mechanical ventilation (11.3 ± 7.7 vs. 9.5 ± 4.5; p = 0.34), SAPS II (41.0 ± 13.6 vs. 42.0 ± 11.7; p = 0.79), or fluid balance (-2,552 ± 6,268 vs. -2,579 ± 5,422 mL; p = 0.98). ETT resistance increased from intubation to extubation: from 6.8 ± 1.1 to 10.6 ± 4.3 cmH(2)O L(-1) s(-1) in the HH group, (p < 0.001) and from 6.8 ± 1.1 to 10.2 ± 3.8 cmH(2)O L(-1) s(-1) in the HME group (p < 0.001), which is a 53% average increase in resistive load.
conclusionsWe did not find differences between the two types of humidifiers in terms of airflow resistance during prolonged mechanical ventilation when the devices were selected on the basis of individual clinical needs. The increase in resistive load is physiologically relevant.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.