Trial reportPloS one2024
Effects of mechanical insufflation-exsufflation on ventilator-free days in intensive care unit subjects with sputum retention; a randomized clinical trial.
Trial report in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07323472 (Analysis of Respiratory Drive Activation, Ventilation, and Pulmonary Aeration Resulting From Body Lateralization in Critically Ill Patients Under Mechanical Ventilation), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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.
Analysis of Respiratory Drive Activation, Ventilation, and Pulmonary Aeration Resulting From Body Lateralization in Critically Ill Patients Under Mechanical Ventilation
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Efficacy and Safety of Mechanical Insufflation-Exsufflation in Invasively Ventilated Critically Ill Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Nursing in critical care · 2026Pooled it
- Physiological and clinical effects of selected airway clearance techniques in mechanically ventilated adult ICU patients: a systematic review and synthesis without meta-analysis.Critical care (London, England) · 2026Pooled it
- Construction and validation of a machine learning-based prediction model for 48-hour reintubation risk in mechanically ventilated patients.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMechanical insufflation-exsufflation (MI-E) facilitates extubation. However, its potential to reduce the duration of ventilator use remains unclear. Therefore, the present study investigated whether the use of MI-E shortened the duration of mechanical ventilation in patients with high sputum retention.
methodsA randomized open-label trial was conducted at a single intensive care unit (ICU) in Japan between November 2017 and June 2019. Ventilated subjects requiring suctioning at least once every hour due to sputum retention were randomly assigned to the MI-E group or conventional care group. The primary endpoint was the number of ventilator-free days on day 28. Secondary endpoints were ventilator days in surviving subjects, the length of ICU stay, and mortality and tracheostomy rates among survivors.
resultsForty-eight subjects (81% males) with a median age of 72 years (interquartile range [IQR], 65-85 years) were enrolled. There were 27 subjects in the MI-E group and 21 in the control group. The median number of ventilator-free days was 21 (IQR, 13-24) and 18, respectively (IQR, 0-23) (P = .38). No significant differences were observed in the ICU length of stay (median, 10 days (IQR, 7-12) vs 12 days (IQR, 6-15); P = .31), mortality rate (19% vs 15%; odds ratio [OR], 1.36 [0.28-6.50]; P = .69), or tracheostomy rate among survivors (14% vs 28%; OR, 0.40 [0.08-1.91]; P = .25).
conclusionIn ventilated subjects in the ICU with high sputum retention, the use of MI-E did not significantly increase the number of ventilator-free days over that with conventional care.
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.