Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35033204›Full record

ReviewJournal of intensive care2022

Noninvasive respiratory support for COVID-19 patients: when, for whom, and how?

Zachary P Sullivan, Luca Zazzeron, Lorenzo Berra, Dean R Hess, Edward A Bittner, Marvin G Chang

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of intensive care, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
–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

20 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Longitudinal Assessment of ROX and HACOR Scores to Predict Non-Invasive Ventilation Failure in Patients with SARS-CoV-2 Pneumonia.Journal of critical care medicine (Universitatea de Medicina si Farmacie din Targu-Mures) · 2024
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

6 authors.

Zachary P SullivanDepartment of Anesthesia, Critical Care and Pain Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, MA, Boston, USA.
Luca ZazzeronDepartment of Anesthesia, Critical Care and Pain Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, MA, Boston, USA.
Lorenzo BerraDepartment of Anesthesia, Critical Care and Pain Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, MA, Boston, USA.
Dean R HessDepartment of Anesthesia, Critical Care and Pain Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, MA, Boston, USA.
Edward A BittnerDepartment of Anesthesia, Critical Care and Pain Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, MA, Boston, USA.
Marvin G ChangDepartment of Anesthesia, Critical Care and Pain Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, MA, Boston, USA. mgchang@partners.org.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The significant mortality rate and prolonged ventilator days associated with invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) in patients with severe COVID-19 have incited a debate surrounding the use of noninvasive respiratory support (NIRS) (i.e., HFNC, CPAP, NIV) as a potential treatment strategy. Central to this debate is the role of NIRS in preventing intubation in patients with mild respiratory disease and the potential beneficial effects on both patient outcome and resource utilization. However, there remains valid concern that use of NIRS may prolong time to intubation and lung protective ventilation in patients with more advanced disease, thereby worsening respiratory mechanics via self-inflicted lung injury. In addition, the risk of aerosolization with the use of NIRS has the potential to increase healthcare worker (HCW) exposure to the virus. We review the existing literature with a focus on rationale, patient selection and outcomes associated with the use of NIRS in COVID-19 and prior pandemics, as well as in patients with acute respiratory failure due to different etiologies (i.e., COPD, cardiogenic pulmonary edema, etc.) to understand the potential role of NIRS in COVID-19 patients. Based on this analysis we suggest an algorithm for NIRS in COVID-19 patients which includes indications and contraindications for use, monitoring recommendations, systems-based practices to reduce HCW exposure, and predictors of NIRS failure. We also discuss future research priorities for addressing unanswered questions regarding NIRS use in COVID-19 with the goal of improving patient outcomes.

Indexed as

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS)Acute respiratory failure (ARF)Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP)COVID-19H1N1High flow nasal cannula (HFNC)Hypoxemic respiratory failureInvasive mechanical ventilation (IMV)MERSNoninvasive respiratory support (NIRS)Noninvasive ventilation (NIV)SARS

Identifiers

PMID35033204
PMCPMC8760575

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.