Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33111980›Full record

Trial reportJournal of medical virology2021

Ozone as adjuvant support in the treatment of COVID-19: A preliminary report of probiozovid trial.

Fabio Araimo, Carmela Imperiale, Paolo Tordiglione, Giancarlo Ceccarelli, Cristian Borrazzo, Francesco Alessandri, Letizia Santinelli, Giuseppe Pietro Innocenti, Claudia Pinacchio, Vera Mauro and 9 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of medical virology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Ozone application in different industries: A review of recent developments.Chemical engineering journal (Lausanne, Switzerland : 1996) · 2023
    Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Compassionate Use of Rectal Ozone (OSN comprehensive clinical medicine · 2021
    Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

19 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Fabio AraimoDepartment of Anesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Carmela ImperialeDepartment of Anesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Paolo TordiglioneDepartment of Anesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Giancarlo CeccarelliDepartment of Anesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Azienda Universitaria-Ospedaliera Policlinico Umberto I, Rome, Italy.
Cristian BorrazzoDepartment of Public Health and Infectious Diseases, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Francesco AlessandriDepartment of Anesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Letizia SantinelliDepartment of Public Health and Infectious Diseases, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Giuseppe Pietro InnocentiDepartment of Public Health and Infectious Diseases, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Claudia PinacchioDepartment of Public Health and Infectious Diseases, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Vera MauroDepartment of Public Health and Infectious Diseases, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Gregorio Egidio RecchiaDepartment of Public Health and Infectious Diseases, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Serena ZanclaDepartment of Anesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Andrea CalòDepartment of Anesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-5012-9334
Roberto PosciaDepartment of Anesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Azienda Universitaria-Ospedaliera Policlinico Umberto I, Rome, Italy.
Franco RubertoDepartment of Anesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Gabriella d'EttorreDepartment of Public Health and Infectious Diseases, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Federico BilottaDepartment of Anesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Claudio MastroianniDepartment of Anesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Azienda Universitaria-Ospedaliera Policlinico Umberto I, Rome, Italy.
Francesco PuglieseDepartment of Anesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Sapienza University of Rome · ITPoliclinico Umberto I · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The evaluation of new therapeutic resources against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) represents a priority in clinical research considering the minimal options currently available. To evaluate the adjuvant use of systemic oxygen-ozone administration in the early control of disease progression in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. PROBIOZOVID is an ongoing, interventional, randomized, prospective, and double-arm trial enrolling patient with COVID-19 pneumonia. From a total of 85 patients screened, 28 were recruited. Patients were randomly divided into ozone-autohemotherapy group (14) and control group (14). The procedure consisted in a daily double-treatment with systemic Oxygen-ozone administration for 7 days. All patients were treated with ad interim best available therapy. The primary outcome was delta in the number of patients requiring orotracheal-intubation despite treatment. Secondary outcome was the difference of mortality between the two groups. Moreover, hematological parameters were compared before and after treatment. No differences in the characteristics between groups were observed at baseline. As a preliminary report we have observed that one patient for each group needed intubation and was transferred to ITU. No deaths were observed at 7-14 days of follow up. Thirty-day mortality was 8.3% for ozone group and 10% for controls. Ozone therapy did not significantly influence inflammation markers, hematology profile, and lymphocyte subpopulations of patients treated. Ozone therapy had an impact on the need for the ventilatory support, although did not reach statistical significance. Finally, no adverse events related to the use of ozone-autohemotherapy were reported. Preliminary results, although not showing statistically significant benefits of ozone on COVID-19, did not report any toxicity.

Indexed as

COVID-19 Drug TreatmentCOVID-19FemaleHumansLymphocyte SubsetsMaleMiddle AgedOxygenOzoneProbioticsSARS-CoV-2OxygenOzoneautohemotherapyozonerespiratory insufficiency

Identifiers

PMID33111980
OpenAlexW3095844406

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.