ArticleJournal of critical care medicine (Universitatea de Medicina si Farmacie din Targu-Mures)2025
Comparative assessment of hemodynamic changes and outcomes in ventilator weaning.
Article in Journal of critical care medicine (Universitatea de Medicina si Farmacie din Targu-Mures), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Mechanical ventilation is fundamental for the management of critically ill patients. The mode of mechanical ventilation may impact the patient in different ways. This study aimed to assess the hemodynamic changes occurring when transitioning between Volume-Controlled Ventilation (VCV) to Variable Pressure Support (VPS) and VCV to Pressure Support (PS) by echocardiography. Also, a comparison between the spontaneous breathing modes in terms of outcomes, specifically, weaning of mechanical ventilation, days on a ventilator, hospital days, and survival, was conducted. Methods: This prospective observational study was conducted on 40 mechanically ventilated patients who showed readiness for weaning from Mechanical ventilation. When transitioning between VCV and VPS in arm A and from VCV to PS in arm B, an echocardiographic assessment (transesophageal echocardiography and transthoracic echocardiography) was performed. Both modes were further compared in terms of weaning and the success of liberation from mechanical ventilation. Results: By comparing both arms, there was a significant difference in velocity time integral (VTI) and stroke volume (SV) for TEE and TTE with p-values of 0.044, 0.022, and 0.05, 0.059, respectively. Also, the cardiac output (CO) showed a statistically significant difference between both arms with a p-value of 0.04. On the other side, there was no statistically significant difference between both arms in terms of ventilator days (p-value of 0.88), length of stay (p-value of 0.651), weaning trial success (p-value of 0.525), and survival rate (p-value of 0.525). Conclusion: The study showed that VPS is a promising modality that can be used in place of PS as a weaning mode. It provides better patient comfort and a more physiological way of breath delivery. The study also concluded that TTE and TEE will show similar results in most patients and that both can be used interchangeably.
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.