ArticleAcute and critical care2021
Airway pressure release ventilation in mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19: a multicenter observational study.
Article in Acute and critical care, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Respiratory system mechanics, gas exchange, and outcomes in mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis.The Lancet. Respiratory medicine · 2022Pooled it
- Early spontaneous breathing for acute respiratory distress syndrome in individuals with COVID-19.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022Pooled it
- Comparison of airway pressure release ventilation (APRV) versus biphasic positive airway pressure (BIPAP) ventilation in COVID-19 associated ARDS using transpulmonary pressure monitoring.BMC anesthesiology · 2025Article
- Acute Respiratory Failure From Early Pandemic COVID-19: Noninvasive Respiratory Support vs Mechanical Ventilation.CHEST critical care · 2024Article
- Does airway pressure release ventilation offer new hope for treating acute respiratory distress syndrome?Journal of intensive medicine · 2022Review
- High-Frequency Oscillatory Ventilation for Refractory Hypoxemia in Severe COVID-19 Pneumonia: A Small Case Series.The American journal of case reports · 2022Article
- Comparison of characteristics and ventilatory course between coronavirus disease 2019 and Middle East respiratory syndrome patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome.Acute and critical care · 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
6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundEvidence prior to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic suggested that, compared with conventional ventilation strategies, airway pressure release ventilation (APRV) can improve oxygenation and reduce mortality in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome. We aimed to assess the association between APRV use and clinical outcomes among adult patients receiving mechanical ventilation for COVID-19 and hypothesized that APRV use would be associated with improved survival compared with conventional ventilation.
methodsA total of 25 patients with COVID-19 pneumonitis was admitted to intensive care units (ICUs) for invasive ventilation in Perth, Western Australia, between February and May 2020. Eleven of these patients received APRV. The primary outcome was survival to day 90. Secondary outcomes were ventilation-free survival days to day 90, mechanical complications from ventilation, and number of days ventilated.
resultsPatients who received APRV had a lower probability of survival than did those on other forms of ventilation (hazard ratio, 0.17; 95% confidence interval, 0.03-0.89; P=0.036). This finding was independent of indices of severity of illness to predict the use of APRV. Patients who received APRV also had fewer ventilator-free survival days up to 90 days after initiation of ventilation compared to patients who did not receive APRV, and survivors who received APRV had fewer ventilator-free days than survivors who received other forms of ventilation. There were no differences in mechanical complications according to mode of ventilation.
conclusionsBased on the findings of this study, we urge caution with the use of APRV in COVID-19.
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.