SynthesisCritical care (London, England)2020
Comparison of T-piece and pressure support ventilation as spontaneous breathing trials in critically ill patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Critical care (London, England), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04939285 (Effect of PEEP=5cmH2O vs PEEP=0cmH2O PSV Strategies During SBT on Successful Disconnection From Mechanical Ventilation), which is not on this map. Cited by 20 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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.
Effect of PEEP=5cmH2O vs PEEP=0cmH2O PSV Strategies During SBT on Successful Disconnection From Mechanical Ventilation: A Randomized Clinical Trial
Who cites it
20 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 56 citations in OpenAlex.
- AARC Clinical Practice Guideline: Spontaneous Breathing Trials for Liberation From Adult Mechanical Ventilation.Respiratory care · 2024Guideline
- Comparative effectiveness of alternative spontaneous breathing trial techniques: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized trials.Critical care (London, England) · 2024Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Spontaneous Breathing Trial Techniques for Extubating Adults and Children Who Are Critically Ill: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.JAMA network open · 2024Pooled it
- Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Four Different Spontaneous Breathing Trials for Weaning From Mechanical Ventilation: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2021Pooled it
- Electromyographic respiratory muscle analysis in the spontaneous breathing trial: a randomized crossover trial comparing T-piece and pressure support.Critical care science · 2026Trial
- Effect of high-flow oxygen versus T-piece ventilation strategies during spontaneous breathing trials on weaning failure among patients receiving mechanical ventilation: a randomized controlled trial.Critical care (London, England) · 2022Trial
- Bridging the Gap: The Role of Non-Invasive Respiratory Supports in Weaning from Invasive Mechanical Ventilation.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Protocol for a non-inferiority randomized controlled trial of spontaneous breathing trial in children with and without pressure support.Critical care science · 2025Article
- Weaning management in a patient with heart dysfunction: a case report.Frontiers in physiology · 2025Article
- Association between ICU quality and in-hospital mortality of V-V ECMO-supported patients-the ECMO quality improvement action (EQIA) study: a national cohort study in China from 2017 to 2019.Frontiers of medicine · 2024Article
- Utilization of spontaneous breathing trial, objective cough test, and diaphragmatic ultrasound results to predict extubation success: COBRE-US trial.Critical care (London, England) · 2023Observational
- Pressure support versus continuous positive airway pressure for predicting successful liberation from invasive ventilation in children: an open label, randomized non-inferiority trial.The Lancet regional health. Southeast Asia · 2023Article
- Association Between Pressure Support During Extubation Readiness Testing and Time to First Extubation in Children With Congenital Heart Disease.Respiratory care · 2023Article
- Factors associated with extubation failure in an intensive care unit: a case-control study.Revista latino-americana de enfermagem · 2023Article
- Effect of spontaneous breathing trial on extubation in patients with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease under mechanical ventilation.BMC emergency medicine · 2022Article
- Comparison between pressure support ventilation and T-piece in spontaneous breathing trials.Respiratory research · 2022Observational
- Laryngeal Dysfunction in Acute Organophosphorus and Carbamate Poisoning.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2022Article
- Predictors of post-extubation stridor in patients on mechanical ventilation: a prospective observational study.Scientific reports · 2021Observational
- Pragmatic Recommendations for the Management of Acute Respiratory Failure and Mechanical Ventilation in Patients with COVID-19 in Low- and Middle-Income Countries.The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe effect of alternative spontaneous breathing trial (SBT) techniques on extubation success and other clinically important outcomes is uncertain. A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to clarify the preferable SBT (T-piece or pressure support ventilation [PSV]).
methodsWe searched the PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from inception to the 31st of July 2019. We included RCTs involving adult patients (> 18 years) who underwent at least two different SBT methods. All authors reported our primary outcome of successful extubation rate and clearly compared PS versus T-piece with clinically relevant secondary outcomes (rate of reintubation, ICU and hospital length of stay, and ICU and hospital mortality). Results were expressed as odds ratio (OR) and mean difference (MD) with accompanying 95% confidence interval (CI).
resultsTen RCTs including 3165 patients were included. The results of this meta-analysis showed that there was no significant difference in the successful extubation rate between the T-piece group and PS group (odds ratio [OR] = 0.91; 95% CI, 0.78-1.07; P = 0.27; I
conclusionsT-piece and PSV as SBTs are considered to have comparable predictive power of successful extubation in critically ill patients. The analysis of secondary outcomes also shows no significant difference in the rate of reintubation, ICU and hospital length of stay, and ICU and hospital mortality between the two groups. Further randomized controlled studies of SBTs are still required.
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.