Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36100904›Full record

Observational studyCritical care (London, England)2022

Respiratory support in patients with severe COVID-19 in the International Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infection (ISARIC) COVID-19 study: a prospective, multinational, observational study.

Luis Felipe Reyes, Srinivas Murthy, Esteban Garcia-Gallo, Laura Merson, Elsa D Ibáñez-Prada, Jordi Rello, Yuli V Fuentes, Ignacio Martin-Loeches, Fernando Bozza, Sara Duque and 20 more

Open access · goldAbstract readMulticenter StudyObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Critical care (London, England), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
6.5field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 44 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. ARDS and corticosteroids: beyond COVID-19.Pneumonia (Nathan Qld.) · 2026
    Review
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Article
  17. Review
  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

30 authors at 20 institutions in 14 countries.

Luis Felipe ReyesPandemic Sciences Institute, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. luis.reyes5@unisabana.edu.co.
Srinivas MurthyDepartment of Pediatrics, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.
Esteban Garcia-GalloInfectious Diseases Department, Universidad de La Sabana, Chía, Colombia.
Laura MersonPandemic Sciences Institute, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Elsa D Ibáñez-PradaInfectious Diseases Department, Universidad de La Sabana, Chía, Colombia.
Jordi RelloClinical Research/Epidemiology in Pneumonia & Sepsis (CRIPS), Vall d'Hebron Institute of Research (VHIR), Barcelona, Spain.
Yuli V FuentesInfectious Diseases Department, Universidad de La Sabana, Chía, Colombia.
Ignacio Martin-LoechesDepartment of Clinical Medicine, St James's Hospital, Multidisciplinary Intensive Care Research Organization (MICRO), Dublin, Ireland.
Fernando BozzaD'Or Institute for Research and Education (IDOR), Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.
Sara DuqueInfectious Diseases Department, Universidad de La Sabana, Chía, Colombia.
Fabio S TacconeDepartment of Intensive Care, Université Libre de Bruxelles (ULB), Brussels, Belgium.
Robert A FowlerInterdepartmental Division of Critical Care Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Christiana KartsonakiPandemic Sciences Institute, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Bronner P GonçalvesPandemic Sciences Institute, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Barbara Wanjiru CitarellaPandemic Sciences Institute, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Diptesh AryalNepal Mediciti Hospital, Lalitpur, Nepal.
Erlina BurhanInfection Division, Department of Pulmonology and Respiratory Medicine, Universitas Indonesia, Depok, Indonesia.
Matthew J CummingsDivision of Pulmonary, Allergy, and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, Columbia University Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons, New York, NY, USA.
Christelle DelmasIAME, INSERM, Paris, France.
Rodrigo DiazIntensive Care Unit, Clinica Las Condes, Santiago, Chile.
Claudia Figueiredo-MelloInstituto de Infectologia Emílio Ribas, São Paulo, Brazil.
Madiha HashmiCritical Care Asia and Ziauddin University, Karachi, Pakistan.
Prasan Kumar PandaAll India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), Rishikesh, India.
Miguel Pedrera JiménezHospital 12 de Octubre, Madrid, Spain.
Diego Fernando Bautista RinconDepartment of Intensive Care, Fundación Valle del Lili, Cali, Colombia.
David ThomsonDivision of Critical Care, University of Cape Town and Groote Schuur Hospital, Cape Town, South Africa.
Alistair NicholUniversity College Dublin Clinical Research Centre at St Vincent's University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.
John C MarshallLi Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, Unity Health Toronto, St Michael's Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Piero L OlliaroPandemic Sciences Institute, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
ISARIC Characterization Group
Universidad de La Sabana · COUniversity of Oxford · GBUniversity of Cape Town · ZAInserm · FRSt. Michael's Hospital · CAUniversity College Dublin · IEFundación Valle del Lili · COSt. James's Hospital · IEAll India Institute of Medical Sciences Rishikesh · INClínica Las Condes · CLColumbia University · USInstituto de Infectologia Emílio Ribas · BRZiauddin University · PKInstituto de Salud Carlos III · ESResearch Institute Hospital 12 de Octubre · ESUniversity of Indonesia · IDUniversity of Toronto · CACentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Rennes · FRD’Or Institute for Research and Education · BRInstitut Pasteur · FR

Funding

Physician Postdoctoral Research Training in Perioperative Medicine (PPRTPM)T32GM112596 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI Roderic G Eckenhoff, Max Kelz · 2015 to 2026
$3.4M
Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation OPP1209135CIHR Coronavirus Rapid Research Funding Opportunity OV2170359Grants from Rapid European COVID-19 Emergency Response research (RECOVER) H2020 project 101003589Medical Research Council MC_PC_19025Medical Research Council MC_PC_19059Medical Research Council MR/S032304/1NHLBI NIH HHS L30 HL159698NIGMS NIH HHS T32 GM112596UK Foreign, Commonwealth, and Development Office and Wellcome 215091/Z/18/ZWellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUp to 30% of hospitalised patients with COVID-19 require advanced respiratory support, including high-flow nasal cannulas (HFNC), non-invasive mechanical ventilation (NIV), or invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). We aimed to describe the clinical characteristics, outcomes and risk factors for failing non-invasive respiratory support in patients treated with severe COVID-19 during the first two years of the pandemic in high-income countries (HICs) and low middle-income countries (LMICs).

methodsThis is a multinational, multicentre, prospective cohort study embedded in the ISARIC-WHO COVID-19 Clinical Characterisation Protocol. Patients with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection who required hospital admission were recruited prospectively. Patients treated with HFNC, NIV, or IMV within the first 24 h of hospital admission were included in this study. Descriptive statistics, random forest, and logistic regression analyses were used to describe clinical characteristics and compare clinical outcomes among patients treated with the different types of advanced respiratory support.

resultsA total of 66,565 patients were included in this study. Overall, 82.6% of patients were treated in HIC, and 40.6% were admitted to the hospital during the first pandemic wave. During the first 24 h after hospital admission, patients in HICs were more frequently treated with HFNC (48.0%), followed by NIV (38.6%) and IMV (13.4%). In contrast, patients admitted in lower- and middle-income countries (LMICs) were less frequently treated with HFNC (16.1%) and the majority received IMV (59.1%). The failure rate of non-invasive respiratory support (i.e. HFNC or NIV) was 15.5%, of which 71.2% were from HIC and 28.8% from LMIC. The variables most strongly associated with non-invasive ventilation failure, defined as progression to IMV, were high leukocyte counts at hospital admission (OR [95%CI]; 5.86 [4.83-7.10]), treatment in an LMIC (OR [95%CI]; 2.04 [1.97-2.11]), and tachypnoea at hospital admission (OR [95%CI]; 1.16 [1.14-1.18]). Patients who failed HFNC/NIV had a higher 28-day fatality ratio (OR [95%CI]; 1.27 [1.25-1.30]).

conclusionsIn the present international cohort, the most frequently used advanced respiratory support was the HFNC. However, IMV was used more often in LMIC. Higher leucocyte count, tachypnoea, and treatment in LMIC were risk factors for HFNC/NIV failure. HFNC/NIV failure was related to worse clinical outcomes, such as 28-day mortality. Trial registration This is a prospective observational study; therefore, no health care interventions were applied to participants, and trial registration is not applicable.

Indexed as

COVID-19Respiratory InsufficiencyHumansProspective StudiesSARS-CoV-2TachypneaCOVID-19Critical careHigh flow nasal cannulaInvasive mechanical ventilation

Identifiers

PMID36100904
PMCPMC9469080
OpenAlexW4295338777

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.