Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36517555›Full record

SynthesisScientific reports2022

Outcome in early vs late intubation among COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.

Denio A Ridjab, Ignatius Ivan, Fanny Budiman, Dafsah A Juzar

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Denio A RidjabDepartment of Medical Education Unit, School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Atma Jaya Catholic University of Indonesia, Jakarta, Indonesia. denio.ridjab@atmajaya.ac.id.ORCID 0000-0002-8726-7693
Ignatius IvanFifth Year Medical Student, School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Atma Jaya Catholic University of Indonesia, Jakarta, Indonesia.ORCID 0000-0001-6177-3793
Fanny BudimanFifth Year Medical Student, School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Atma Jaya Catholic University of Indonesia, Jakarta, Indonesia.ORCID 0000-0002-6716-9164
Dafsah A JuzarDepartment of Cardiology and Vascular Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Indonesia, National Cardiovascular Center of Harapan Kita, Jakarta, Indonesia.ORCID 0000-0001-8392-4759
Atma Jaya Catholic University of Indonesia · IDUniversity of Indonesia · ID

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Timing of endotracheal intubation in COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) remains controversial regarding its risk and benefit in patient outcomes. Our study aims to elucidate early versus late intubation outcomes among COVID-19 patients with ARDS. A protocol of this study is registered at the international prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO) (CRD42021230272). We report our systematic review based on PRISMA and MOOSE guidelines. We searched the Cochrane Library, EBSCOhost, EMBASE, Grey Literature Report, OpenGrey, ProQuest, PubMed, and ScienceDirect from inception until 4 December 2021. Titles and abstracts were reviewed for their relevance. The risk of bias in each study was evaluated using the risk of bias in non-randomised studies-of interventions (ROBINS-I) guideline. Trial sequential analysis is done to elucidate firm evidence. We retrieved 20 observational studies that assessed an intervention (early vs. late intubation). Meta-analysis for in-hospital mortality reduction showed 119 fewer deaths per 1000 patients in early intubation. Early intubation reduces 2.81 days of ICU length of stay (LOS) and 2.12 days of ventilation duration. Benefits for mortality and ICU LOS reduction were based on studies with low to moderate risk of bias while ventilation duration was based on low disease burden setting. According to the contextualized approach, the benefit of mortality reduction showed a trivial effect, while ICU LOS and ventilation duration showed a small effect. GRADE certainty of evidence for mortality reduction in early intubation is moderate. The certainty of evidence for ICU length of stay, ventilation duration, ventilator-free days, and continuous renal replacement therapy are very low. This updated systematic review provided new evidence that early intubation might provide benefits in treating COVID-19 patients with ARDS. The benefits of early intubation appear to have an important but small effect based on contextualized approach for ICU LOS and ventilation duration. In reducing in-hospital mortality, the early intubation effect was present but only trivial based on contextualized approach. TSA showed that more studies are needed to elucidate firmer evidence.

Indexed as

COVID-19Respiratory Distress SyndromeHospital MortalityHumansIntubation, IntratrachealLength of Stay

Identifiers

PMID36517555
PMCPMC9748395
OpenAlexW4311493259

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.