ArticlePulmonary circulation
Switching inhaled iloprost formulations in patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension: the VENTASWITCH Trial.
Article in Pulmonary circulation. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome and the Use of Inhaled Pulmonary Vasodilators in the COVID-19 Era: A Narrative Review.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Clinical efficacy, safety, tolerability, and survival outcome of long-term inhaled iloprost treatment in the management of pulmonary arterial hypertension: Data from prospective multicenter observational OPTION study.Anatolian journal of cardiology · 2021Observational
- The Effects of Iloprost on Oxygenation During One-Lung Ventilation for Lung Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of clinical medicine · 2019Article
- Acute response to rapid iloprost inhalation using the Breelib™ nebulizer in pulmonary arterial hypertension: the Breelib™ acute study.Pulmonary circulationArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Inhaled iloprost is an effective therapy for patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH); however, some patients experience extended inhalation times when using the V10 formulation (10.0 µg/mL) to deliver a 5 -µg dose (at mouthpiece) and are at risk of incomplete inhalations and reduced inhalation frequency. VENTASWITCH was an observational, case-crossover study to evaluate inhalation behavior in patients with PAH switched from iloprost V10 to V20 (20.0 µg/mL) formulation for delivering a 5 -µg dose using the I-Neb® AAD® device. Adults with PAH participating in a German Ventavis® (iloprost) patient-support program, who were switched from the V10 to V20 formulation, were enrolled. The co-primary endpoints were mean daily proportion of complete inhalations and mean daily inhalation frequency. The secondary endpoint was mean daily inhalation duration. Data were collected for three months before and after switching. Overall, 63 patients were included. Switching from V10 to V20 resulted in a significant increase in the mean daily proportion of complete inhalations (92% vs. 97%, P < 0.0001) and inhalation frequency (4.6 vs. 4.9 inhalations/day, P = 0.0430), and reduction in mean inhalation duration (11.8 vs. 6.5 min; P < 0.0001). Greater increases in daily proportions of complete inhalations were observed in older patients (≥ 65 vs. < 65 years) and those receiving more (3 vs. < 3) concomitant PAH medications. Switching from V10 to V20 iloprost formulation significantly improved inhalation behavior in patients with PAH and may facilitate improved adherence to therapy.
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.