ArticleERJ open research2025
Inhaled nitric oxide for the treatment of COVID-19: an open-label, parallel, randomised controlled trial.
Article in ERJ open research, 2025. 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.
- Therapeutic Gases in Biomedicine: Updates on Nitric Oxide and Beyond.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026Review
- The therapeutic potential of high-dose inhaled nitric oxide for antimicrobial effects: a narrative review and future directions.Intensive care medicine experimental · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Inhaled nitric oxide (iNO) in high concentration inhibits SARS-CoV-2 replication in epithelial cells and may prevent severe disease in hospitalised patients. The aim of this study was to evaluate safety and efficacy of iNO 160 ppm on supplemental oxygen in patients hospitalised with COVID-19. Methods: We conducted an open-label, randomised clinical trial in hospitalised patients with COVID-19 receiving supplemental oxygen. Patients were randomly assigned to receive iNO for 6 h in addition to standard of care. The primary safety end-point was assessed by incidence of adverse events. The secondary efficacy end-point was the number of days free of supplemental oxygen within 15 days after randomisation. Results: 55 patients were enrolled, 27 in the iNO group and 27 in the control group, and one patient was excluded. No adverse events occurred with the inhalation of nitric oxide. Median (IQR) number of days free of supplemental oxygen was 11 (8.0-13.0) in the iNO group and 8 (2.5-10.5) in the control group (p=0.044). The iNO group had a shorter length of hospital stay (4.5 days (3.0-6.3) compared to 7.0 days (6.0-10.0) in the control group; p=0.004). Clinical score was lower in the iNO group on days 3 and 5 (p=0.010 and p=0.033). The number of patients weaned from ventilatory support on day 3 was higher in the iNO group (n=9 (33%)) when compared to controls (n=1 (4%)); p=0.005. Respiratory failure and mortality did not differ between the groups. Conclusion: The iNO treatment was well tolerated and safe. Among adults hospitalised for COVID-19, iNO 160 ppm for 6 h increased the number of days free from supplemental oxygen, shortened the days of ventilatory support and the length of hospital stay, and improved the clinical score.
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.