Observational studyMedicine2020
The prognosis in extremely elderly patients receiving orotracheal intubation and mechanical ventilation after planned extubation.
Observational study in Medicine, 2020. 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, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Nurse-performed diaphragm ultrasound integrated with spontaneous breathing trial criteria for risk stratification of extubation outcomes in neurosurgical critically ill patients: a multicenter prospective cohort study.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Differences in directives to limit treatment and discontinue mechanical ventilation between elderly and very elderly patients: a substudy of a multinational observational study.Intensive care medicine · 2023Observational
- Can the Multidimensional Prognostic Index Improve the Identification of Older Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19 Likely to Benefit from Mechanical Ventilation? An Observational, Prospective, Multicenter Study.Journal of the American Medical Directors Association · 2022Observational
- Accuracy and Sensitivity of Clinical Parameters in Predicting Successful Extubation in Patients with Acute Brain Injury.Neurology international · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The main objective of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of extremely elderly patients receiving orotracheal intubation and mechanical ventilation after planned extubation. This retrospective cohort study included extremely elderly patients (>90 years) who received mechanical ventilation and passed planned extubation. We reviewed all intensive care unit patients in a medical center between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2017. There were 19,518 patients (aged between 20 and 105 years) during the study period. After application of the exclusion criteria, there were 213 patients who underwent planned extubation: 166 patients survived, and 47 patients died. Compared with the mortality group, the survival group had lower Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II scores and higher Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) scores, with scores of 19.7 ± 6.5 (mean ± standard deviation) vs 22.2 ± 6.0 (P = .015) and 9.5 ± 3.5 vs 8.0 ± 3.0 (P = .007), respectively. The laboratory data revealed no significant difference between the survival and mortality groups except for blood urea nitrogen (BUN) and hemoglobin. After multivariate logistic regression analysis, a lower GCS, a higher BUN level, weaning beginning 3 days after intubation and reintubation during hospitalization were associated with poor prognosis. In this cohort of extremely elderly patients undergoing planned extubation, a lower GCS, a higher BUN level, weaning beginning 3 days after intubation and reintubation during hospitalization were associated with mortality.
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.