ArticleJournal of critical care2022
Letter to the Editor: "Use of inhaled epoprostenol with high flow nasal oxygen in non-intubated patients with severe COVID-19".
Article in Journal of critical care, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Inhaled Pulmonary Vasodilators in COVID-19 Infection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of intensive care medicine · 2022Pooled it
- Evaluation and Management of Sepsis in Pulmonary Hypertension.Journal of intensive care medicine · 2025Review
- Use of Inhaled Epoprostenol in Patients With COVID-19 Receiving Humidified, High-Flow Nasal Oxygen Is Associated With Progressive Respiratory Failure.CHEST critical care · 2023Article
- Enhanced Aerosol Delivery During High-Flow Nasal Cannula Therapy.Respiratory care · 2023Article
- Lessons Learned in Mechanical Ventilation/Oxygen Support in Coronavirus Disease 2019.Clinics in chest medicine · 2023Review
- Inhaled Prostacyclins for Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Critical care explorations · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeAcute lung injury associated with COVID-19 contributes significantly to its morbidity and mortality. Though invasive mechanical ventilation is sometimes necessary, the use of high flow nasal oxygen may avoid the need for mechanical ventilation in some patients. For patients approaching the limits of high flow nasal oxygen support, addition of inhaled pulmonary vasodilators is becoming more common but little is known about its effects. This is the first descriptive study of a cohort of patients receiving inhaled epoprostenol with high flow nasal oxygen for COVID-19. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe collected clinical data from the first fifty patients to receive inhaled epoprostenol while on high flow nasal oxygen at our institution. We compared the characteristics of patients who did and did not respond to epoprostenol addition.
resultsThe 18 patients that did not stabilize or improve following initiation of inhaled epoprostenol had similar rates of invasive mechanical ventilation as those who improved or stabilized (50% vs 56%). Rates of mortality were not significantly different between the two groups (17% and 31%).
conclusionsIn patients with COVID-19 induced hypoxemic respiratory failure, the use of inhaled epoprostenol with high flow nasal oxygen is feasible, but physiologic signs of response were not related to clinical outcomes.
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.