Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34541721›Full record

ReviewExperimental physiology2022

Mechanical ventilation in COVID-19: A physiological perspective.

John N Cronin, Luigi Camporota, Federico Formenti

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Experimental physiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Impact of Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Circuitry on Remdesivir.The journal of pediatric pharmacology and therapeutics : JPPT : the official journal of PPAG · 2024
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. The Impact of COVID-19 on Children and Adolescents with Chronic Illness.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2024
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

3 authors.

John N CroninCentre for Human and Applied Physiological Sciences, School of Basic and Medical Biosciences, King's College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-5424-3591
Luigi CamporotaCentre for Human and Applied Physiological Sciences, School of Basic and Medical Biosciences, King's College London, London, UK.
Federico FormentiCentre for Human and Applied Physiological Sciences, School of Basic and Medical Biosciences, King's College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-4289-0761

Funding

Department of Health NIHR200681
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

NEW

findingsWhat is the topic of this review? This review presents the fundamental concepts of respiratory physiology and pathophysiology, with particular reference to lung mechanics and the pulmonary phenotype associated with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and subsequent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia. What advances does it highlight? The review provides a critical summary of the main physiological aspects to be considered for safe and effective mechanical ventilation in patients with severe COVID-19 in the intensive care unit. ABSTRACT: Severe respiratory failure from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia not responding to non-invasive respiratory support requires mechanical ventilation. Although ventilation can be a life-saving therapy, it can cause further lung injury if airway pressure and flow and their timing are not tailored to the respiratory system mechanics of the individual patient. The pathophysiology of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection can lead to a pattern of lung injury in patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia typically associated with two distinct phenotypes, along a temporal and pathophysiological continuum, characterized by different levels of elastance, ventilation-to-perfusion ratio, right-to-left shunt, lung weight and recruitability. Understanding the underlying pathophysiology, duration of symptoms, radiological characteristics and lung mechanics at the individual patient level is crucial for the appropriate choice of mechanical ventilation settings to optimize gas exchange and prevent further lung injury. By critical analysis of the literature, we propose fundamental physiological and mechanical criteria for the selection of ventilation settings for COVID-19 patients in intensive care units. In particular, the choice of tidal volume should be based on obtaining a driving pressure < 14 cmH

Indexed as

Respiration, ArtificialSARS-CoV-2COVID-19HumansIntensive Care UnitsLung InjuryRespiratory Distress SyndromeRespiratory MechanicsTidal VolumeartificialCOVID-19critical carephysiologyrespirationrespiratoryrespiratory distress syndromeSARS-CoV-2

Identifiers

PMID34541721
PMCPMC8667647

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.