Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33741052›Full record

Observational studyCritical care (London, England)2021

Early effects of ventilatory rescue therapies on systemic and cerebral oxygenation in mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome: a prospective observational study.

Chiara Robba, Lorenzo Ball, Denise Battaglini, Danilo Cardim, Emanuela Moncalvo, Iole Brunetti, Matteo Bassetti, Daniele R Giacobbe, Antonio Vena, Nicolò Patroniti and 4 more

Open access · goldAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Critical care (London, England), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
7.8field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

32 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 58 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Inhaled Nitric Oxide for Clinical Management of COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Observational
  13. Review
  14. Observational
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors at 3 institutions in 4 countries.

Chiara RobbaDepartment of Surgical Sciences and Integrated Diagnostics (DISC), University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy. kiarobba@gmail.com.
Lorenzo Ball *Department of Surgical Sciences and Integrated Diagnostics (DISC), University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy.
Denise Battaglini *IRCCS for Oncology and Neuroscience, Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Genoa, Italy.
Danilo CardimDepartment of Neurology, University of Texas, Austin, USA.
Emanuela MoncalvoDepartment of Surgical Sciences and Integrated Diagnostics (DISC), University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy.
Iole BrunettiIRCCS for Oncology and Neuroscience, Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Genoa, Italy.
Matteo BassettiDepartment of Health Sciences (DISSAL), University of Genoa, Genoa , Italy.
Daniele R GiacobbeDepartment of Health Sciences (DISSAL), University of Genoa, Genoa , Italy.
Antonio VenaInfectious Diseases Unit, IRCCS for Oncology and Neuroscience, Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Genoa, Italy.
Nicolò PatronitiDepartment of Surgical Sciences and Integrated Diagnostics (DISC), University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy.
Patricia R M RoccoLaboratory of Pulmonary Investigation, Carlos Chagas Filho Institute of Biophysics, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio De Janeiro, Brazil.
Basil F MattaNeurocritical Care Unit, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, UK.
Paolo PelosiDepartment of Surgical Sciences and Integrated Diagnostics (DISC), University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy.
collaborators
Ospedale Policlinico San Martino · ITUniversidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro · BRUniversity of Genoa · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), the effectiveness of ventilatory rescue strategies remains uncertain, with controversial efficacy on systemic oxygenation and no data available regarding cerebral oxygenation and hemodynamics.

methodsThis is a prospective observational study conducted at San Martino Policlinico Hospital, Genoa, Italy. We included adult COVID-19 patients who underwent at least one of the following rescue therapies: recruitment maneuvers (RMs), prone positioning (PP), inhaled nitric oxide (iNO), and extracorporeal carbon dioxide (CO

resultsForty-five rescue therapies were performed in 22 patients. The median [interquartile range] age of the population was 62 [57-69] years, and 18/22 [82%] were male. After RMs, no significant changes were observed in systemic PaO

conclusionsRescue therapies exert specific pathophysiological mechanisms, resulting in different effects on systemic and cerebral oxygenation in critically ill COVID-19 patients with ARDS. Cerebral and systemic oxygenation are correlated. The choice of rescue strategy to be adopted should take into account both lung and brain needs. Registration The study protocol was approved by the ethics review board (Comitato Etico Regione Liguria, protocol n. CER Liguria: 23/2020).

Indexed as

Cerebrovascular CirculationRespiration, ArtificialAgedCOVID-19FemaleHumansItalyMaleMiddle AgedOxygenProspective StudiesRespiratory Distress SyndromeTreatment OutcomeOxygenCarbon dioxide removalCerebral oxygenationCoronavirusProne positionRecruitment maneuversRescue therapies

Identifiers

PMID33741052
PMCPMC7978164
OpenAlexW3139131015

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.