ArticleJournal of anaesthesiology, clinical pharmacology2014
High-frequency percussive ventilation in severe acute respiratory distress syndrome: A single center experience.
Article in Journal of anaesthesiology, clinical pharmacology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: Mechanical Ventilation vs. High-Frequency Percussive Ventilation.Canadian respiratory journal · 2026Article
- High-frequency percussive ventilation in acute respiratory failure.ERJ open research · 2024Article
- High-Frequency Percussive Ventilation in Viral Bronchiolitis.Respiratory care · 2022Article
- High frequency percussive ventilation for respiratory immobilization in radiotherapy.Technical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology · 2019Article
- High-frequency percussive ventilation in acute respiratory distress syndrome: knocking at the door but can it be let in?Critical care (London, England) · 2018Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFew studies have investigated high-frequency percussive ventilation (HFPV) in adult patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). MATERIALS AND
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed data from critically ill-patients with moderate and severe ARDS who received HFPV. Ventilation and oxygenation were governed according to a predefined protocol. HFPV was continued until patients could be switched to conventional ventilation.
resultsA total of 42 patients (20 with pneumonia-related ARDS and 22 non-septic ARDS cases) were evaluable. Baseline demographic characteristics, severity of illness, lung injury score; pH and respiratory variables were comparable between pneumonia and non-sepsis-related ARDS. Within 24 h, HFPV restored normal pH and PaCO2 and considerably improved oxygenation. Oxygenation improved more in non-septic than in pneumonia-related ARDS. Patients with pneumonia-induced ARDS also remained longer HFPV-dependent (7.0 vs. 4.9 days; P < 0.05). Mortality at 30 days was significantly higher in pneumonia-related than in non-sepsis-related ARDS (50% vs. 18%; P = 0.01).
conclusionsHFPV caused rapid and sustained improvement of oxygenation and ventilation in patients with moderate to severe ARDS. Less improved oxygenation, longer ventilator dependency and worse survival were observed in pneumonia-related ARDS.
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.