Trial reportBrazilian journal of cardiovascular surgery
Extended-time of Noninvasive Positive Pressure Ventilation Improves Tissue Perfusion after Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery: a Randomized Clinical Trial.
Trial report in Brazilian journal of cardiovascular surgery. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the effects of extended- versus short-time noninvasive positive pressure ventilation on pulmonary function, tissue perfusion, and clinical outcomes in the early postoperative period following coronary artery bypass surgery in patients with preserved left ventricular function.
methodsPatients were randomized into two groups according to noninvasive positive pressure ventilation intensity: short-time noninvasive positive pressure ventilation n=20 (S-NPPV) and extended-time noninvasive positive pressure ventilation n=21 (E-NPPV). S-NPPV was applied for 60 minutes during immediate postoperative period and 10 minutes, twice daily, from postoperative days 1-5. E-NPPV was performed for at least six hours during immediate postoperative period and 60 minutes, twice daily, from postoperative days 1-5. As a primary outcome, tissue perfusion was determined by central venous oxygen saturation and blood lactate level measured after anesthetic induction, immediately after extubation and following noninvasive positive pressure ventilation protocols. As a secondary outcome, pulmonary function tests were performed preoperatively and in the postoperative days 1, 3, and 5; clinical outcomes were recorded.
resultsSignificant drop in blood lactate levels and an improvement in central venous oxygen saturation values in the E-NPPV group were observed when compared with S-NPPV group after study protocol (P<0.01). The E-NPPV group presented higher preservation of postoperative pulmonary function as well as lower incidence of respiratory events and shorter postoperative hospital stay (P<0.05).
conclusionProphylactic E-NPPV administered in the early postoperative period of coronary artery bypass surgery resulted in greater improvements in tissue perfusion, pulmonary function and clinical outcomes than S-NPPV, in patients with preserved left ventricular function.
trial registrationBrazilian Registry of Clinical trial - RBR7sqj78 - http://www.ensaiosclinicos.gov.br.
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.