ReviewAnnals of intensive care2016
Nebulized heparin for patients under mechanical ventilation: an individual patient data meta-analysis.
Review in Annals of intensive care, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 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
22 citing papers in PubMed, 39 citations in OpenAlex.
- Nebulized heparin and salbutamol versus salbutamol alone in acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease requiring mechanical ventilation: a double-blind randomized controlled trial.Korean journal of anesthesiology · 2020Trial
- Inhaled Heparin to Shorten Antibiotic Duration in Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia: A Randomized Double-Blind Controlled Trial.Health science reports · 2026Article
- Scheduled Bronchoscopy with Nebulized Heparin and N-Acetylcysteine in Burn Patients with Inhalation Injury: A Randomized Trial.European burn journal · 2026Article
- Efficacy of inhaled nebulised unfractionated heparin to prevent intubation or death in hospitalised patients with COVID-19: an investigator-initiated international meta-trial of randomised clinical studies.EClinicalMedicine · 2025Article
- Comprehensive review of clinical presentation, treatment, and prognostic factors of airway burns.Journal of medicine and life · 2025Review
- Article
- Heparin, Low Molecular Weight Heparin, and Non-Anticoagulant Derivatives for the Treatment of Inflammatory Lung Disease.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Anticoagulant Treatment in Severe ARDS COVID-19 Patients.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
- Effect of Nebulized Heparin on Weaning off Intubated Patients with Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) Admitted to Intensive Care Unit (ICU): A Randomized Clinical Trial.Anesthesiology and pain medicine · 2021Article
- Nebulised heparin for patients on ventilation: implications for COVID-19 pneumonia.The Lancet. Respiratory medicine · 2021Article
- The Potential Role of Coagulation Factor Xa in the Pathophysiology of COVID-19: A Role for Anticoagulants as Multimodal Therapeutic Agents.TH open : companion journal to thrombosis and haemostasis · 2020Review
- Nebulised heparin as a treatment for COVID-19: scientific rationale and a call for randomised evidence.Critical care (London, England) · 2020Review
- Future Trends in Nebulized Therapies for Pulmonary Disease.Journal of personalized medicine · 2020Review
- Nebulized Heparin in Burn Patients with Inhalation Trauma-Safety and Feasibility.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Article
- Nebulized heparin for inhalation injury in burn patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Burns & trauma · 2020Article
- Article
- Inhalation Injury in the Burned Patient.Annals of plastic surgery · 2018Review
- Anticoagulant therapy in acute respiratory distress syndrome.Annals of translational medicine · 2018Review
- Personalized physiological medicine.Critical care (London, England) · 2017Review
- Nebulized anticoagulants in lung injury in critically ill patients-an updated systematic review of preclinical and clinical studies.Annals of translational medicine · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 7 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pulmonary coagulopathy is a characteristic feature of lung injury including ventilator-induced lung injury. The aim of this individual patient data meta-analysis is to assess the effects of nebulized anticoagulants on outcome of ventilated intensive care unit (ICU) patients. A systematic search of PubMed (1966-2014), Scopus, EMBASE, and Web of Science was conducted to identify relevant publications. Studies evaluating nebulization of anticoagulants in ventilated patients were screened for inclusion, and corresponding authors of included studies were contacted to provide individual patient data. The primary endpoint was the number of ventilator-free days and alive at day 28. Secondary endpoints included hospital mortality, ICU- and hospital-free days at day 28, and lung injury scores at day seven. We constructed a propensity score-matched cohort for comparisons between patients treated with nebulized anticoagulants and controls. Data from five studies (one randomized controlled trial, one open label study, and three studies using historical controls) were included in the meta-analysis, compassing 286 patients. In all studies unfractionated heparin was used as anticoagulant. The number of ventilator-free days and alive at day 28 was higher in patients treated with nebulized heparin compared to patients in the control group (14 [IQR 0-23] vs. 6 [IQR 0-22]), though the difference did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.459). The number of ICU-free days and alive at day 28 was significantly higher, and the lung injury scores at day seven were significantly lower in patients treated with nebulized heparin. In the propensity score-matched analysis, there were no differences in any of the endpoints. This individual patient data meta-analysis provides no convincing evidence for benefit of heparin nebulization in intubated and ventilated ICU patients. The small patient numbers and methodological shortcomings of included studies underline the need for high-quality well-powered randomized controlled trials.
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.