Trial reportPhysiological research2020
Minute ventilation stabilization during all pressure-control / support mechanical ventilation modes.
Trial report in Physiological research, 2020. 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- How Slovakia Is Handling the Outbreak?Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The main goal of our prospective randomized study was comparing compare the effectiveness of ventilation control method "Automatic proportional minute ventilation (APMV) "versus manually set pressure control ventilation modes in relationship to lung mechanics and gas exchange. 80 patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) were randomized into 2 groups. 40 patients in the first group No.1 (APMV group) were ventilated with pressure control (PCV) or pressure support ventilation (PSV) mode with APMV control. The other 40 patients (control group No.2) were ventilated with synchronized intermittent mandatory ventilation (SIMV-p) or pressure control modes (PCV) without APMV. Ventilation control with APMV was able to maintain minute ventilation more precisely in comparison with manual control (p<0.01), similarly deviations of ETCO(2) were significantly lower (p<0.01). The number of manual corrections of ventilation settings was significantly lower when APMV was used (p<0.01). The differences in lung mechanics and hemodynamics were not statistically significant. Ventilation using APMV is more precise in maintaining minute ventilation and gas exchange compared with manual settings. It required less staff intervention, while respiratory system mechanics and hemodynamics are comparable. APMV showed as effective and safe method applicable on top of all pressure control ventilation modes.
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.