Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35628835›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2022

The Impact of Different Ventilatory Strategies on Clinical Outcomes in Patients with COVID-19 Pneumonia.

Rihards P Rocans, Agnese Ozolina, Denise Battaglini, Evita Bine, Janis V Birnbaums, Anastasija Tsarevskaya, Sintija Udre, Marija Aleksejeva, Biruta Mamaja, Paolo Pelosi

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 43% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
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

10 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Rihards P RocansAnesthesiology and Intensive Care Clinics, Riga East Clinical University Hospital, Hipokrata Street 2, LV-1079 Riga, Latvia.ORCID 0000-0001-8145-7261
Agnese OzolinaAnesthesiology and Intensive Care Clinics, Riga East Clinical University Hospital, Hipokrata Street 2, LV-1079 Riga, Latvia.
Denise BattagliniAnesthesiology and Critical Care, San Martino Policlinico Hospital, IRCCS for Oncology and Neurosciences, 16132 Genoa, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-6895-6442
Evita BineAnesthesiology and Intensive Care Clinics, Riga East Clinical University Hospital, Hipokrata Street 2, LV-1079 Riga, Latvia.
Janis V BirnbaumsAnesthesiology and Intensive Care Clinics, Riga East Clinical University Hospital, Hipokrata Street 2, LV-1079 Riga, Latvia.
Anastasija TsarevskayaDepartment of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Riga Stradiņš University, Dzirciema Street 16, LV-1007 Riga, Latvia.
Sintija UdreFaculty of Medicine, University of Latvia, Raina Boulevard 19, LV-1586 Riga, Latvia.
Marija AleksejevaFaculty of Medicine, University of Latvia, Raina Boulevard 19, LV-1586 Riga, Latvia.
Biruta MamajaAnesthesiology and Intensive Care Clinics, Riga East Clinical University Hospital, Hipokrata Street 2, LV-1079 Riga, Latvia.ORCID 0000-0002-7194-5453
Paolo PelosiAnesthesiology and Critical Care, San Martino Policlinico Hospital, IRCCS for Oncology and Neurosciences, 16132 Genoa, Italy.
Riga East University Hospital · LVOspedale Policlinico San Martino · ITUniversity of Latvia · LVRiga Stradiņš University · LV

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: The aim was to investigate the impact of different ventilator strategies (non-invasive ventilation (NIV); invasive MV with tracheal tube (TT) and with tracheostomy (TS) on outcomes (mortality and intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay) in patients with COVID-19. We also assessed the impact of timing of percutaneous tracheostomy and other risk factors on mortality. Methods: The retrospective cohort included 868 patients with severe COVID-19. Demographics, MV parameters and duration, and ICU mortality were collected. Results: MV was provided in 530 (61.1%) patients, divided into three groups: NIV (n = 139), TT (n = 313), and TS (n = 78). Prevalence of tracheostomy was 14.7%, and ICU mortality was 90.4%, 60.2%, and 30.2% in TT, TS, and NIV groups, respectively (p < 0.001). Tracheostomy increased the chances of survival and being discharged from ICU (OR 6.3, p < 0.001) despite prolonging ICU stay compared to the TT group (22.2 days vs. 10.7 days, p < 0.001) without differences in survival rates between early and late tracheostomy. Patients who only received invasive MV had higher odds of survival compared to those receiving NIV in ICU prior to invasive MV (OR 2.7, p = 0.001). The odds of death increased with age (OR 1.032, p < 0.001), obesity (1.58, p = 0.041), chronic renal disease (1.57, p = 0.019), sepsis (2.8, p < 0.001), acute kidney injury (1.7, p = 0.049), multiple organ dysfunction (3.2, p < 0.001), and ARDS (3.3, p < 0.001). Conclusions: Percutaneous tracheostomy compared to MV via TT significantly increased survival and the rate of discharge from ICU, without differences between early or late tracheostomy.

Indexed as

COVID-19intensive carepercutaneous tracheostomytracheostomy

Identifiers

PMID35628835
PMCPMC9143826
OpenAlexW4280524534

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.