Observational studyPloS one2022
Risk factors for mechanical ventilation and ECMO in COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU: A multicenter retrospective observational study.
Observational study in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Use of machine learning models to predict mechanical ventilation, ECMO, and mortality in COVID-19.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2025Article
- Public Health and Economic Impact of Periodic COVID-19 Vaccination with BNT162b2 for Old Adults and High-Risk Patients in an Illustrative Prefecture of Japan: A Budget Impact Analysis.Infectious diseases and therapy · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe primary purpose of this study was to investigate risk factors associated with the need for mechanical ventilation (MV) and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) in COVID-19 patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU).
methodsWe retrospectively enrolled 66 consecutive COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICUs of three Japanese institutions from February 2020 to January 2021. We performed logistic regression analyses to identify risk factors associated with subsequent MV and ECMO requirements. Further, multivariate analyses were performed following adjustment for Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II scores.
resultsAt ICU admission, the risk factors for subsequent MV identified were: higher age (Odds Ratio (OR) 1.04, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 1.00-1.08, P = 0.03), higher values of APACHE II score (OR 1.20, 95% CI 1.08-1.33, P < 0.001), Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score (OR 1.53, 95% CI 1.18-1.97, P < 0.001), lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) (OR 1.01, 95% CI 1.00-1.02, p<0.001) and C-reactive protein (OR 1.09, 95% CI 1.00-1.19, P = 0.04), and lower values of lymphocytes (OR 1.00, 95% CI 1.00-1.00, P = 0.02) and antithrombin (OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.91-0.95, P < 0.01). Patients who subsequently required ECMO showed lower values of estimated glomerular filtration rate (OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.96-1.00, P = 0.04) and antithrombin (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.88-1.00, P = 0.03) at ICU admission. Multivariate analysis showed that higher body mass index (OR 1.19, 95% CI 1.00-1.40, P = 0.04) and higher levels of LDH (OR 1.01, 95% CI 1.01-1.02, P < 0.01) were independent risk factors for the need for MV. Lower level of antithrombin (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.88-1.00, P = 0.03) was a risk factor for the need for ECMO.
conclusionWe showed that low antithrombin level at ICU admission might be a risk factor for subsequent ECMO requirements, in addition to other previously reported factors.
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.