ArticleERJ open research2019
Volatile organic compound profiles in outlet air from extracorporeal life-support devices differ from breath profiles in critically ill patients.
Article in ERJ open research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Exhaled Breath and Oxygenator Sweep Gas Propionaldehyde in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Breath Biopsy and Discovery of Exclusive Volatile Organic Compounds for Diagnosis of Infectious Diseases.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2020Review
- Exploring the Ability of Electronic Nose Technology to Recognize Interstitial Lung Diseases (ILD) by Non-Invasive Breath Screening of Exhaled Volatile Compounds (VOC): A Pilot Study from the European IPF Registry (eurIPFreg) and Biobank.Journal of clinical medicine · 2019Article
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 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionIt is highly uncertain whether volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in exhaled breath of critically ill intensive care unit patients are formed in the lung locally, in the air compartment or lung tissue, or elsewhere in the body and transported to the lung
methodsFirst, we investigated whether it was safe to connect an electronic nose (eNose) or a gas sampling pump to extracorporeal support membranes. Then, breath and air from extracorporeal support devices were collected simultaneously for continuous monitoring of VOC mixtures using an eNose. In addition, samples for gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC-MS) analysis were taken daily at the two measurement sites.
results10 critically ill patients were monitored for a median (interquartile range) duration of 73 (72-113) h; in total, we had 887 h of air sampling. The eNose signals of breath correlated moderately with signals of air from the extracorporeal support devices (R
conclusionThis study suggests VOC analysis in the extracorporeal circulation is safe, and that VOCs of nonpulmonary origin can be measured in the breath and in the extracorporeal circulation of critically ill patients. For VOCs that did not correlate between the two measurement sites, the breath concentration was higher, suggesting pulmonary production of these molecules in a highly selected population of patients that received extracorporeal support.
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.