Trial reportSpinal cord2026
35 years of long-term invasive mechanical ventilation in high tetraplegic patients due to chronic respiratory failure - comparative results of pressure- (PCV) and volume-controlled ventilation (VCV) in the out-of-hospital setting.
Trial report in Spinal cord, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
STUDY
designRetrospective, randomised controlled, monocentric, longitudinal cohort study.
objectivesTo evaluate data from outpatient clinical practice to determine whether the chosen ventilation mode (PCV or VCV) affects the rate of pneumonia, post-discharge survival and mortality, with the aim of ensuring appropriate long-term ventilation outside the hospital for tetraplegic patients on invasive long-term ventilation.
settingData collection and patient examinations were conducted in a german clinical setting (BG Trauma Hospital Hamburg), while long-term ventilation and outpatient intensive care were provided exclusively outside the hospital setting in the patients' home environment in Germany.
methodsOver a period of 35 years (01.01.1985 - 31.12.2019), two patient cohorts (Level of lesion C2-C4) permanently invasive ventilated either pressure-controlled (PCV n = 21) or volume-controlled (VCV n = 21) due to complete diaphragm paralysis were examined at regular intervals of 1-2 years. A group of patients with spinal cord injury (n = 83), level of lesion C4-C6 AIS A, that had not received mechanical ventilation at any point prior to the study proper word was randomised and used as a control group.
resultsNeither PCV nor VCV have significant influence on the pneumonia rate, the out-of-hospital survival and the mortality. As expected, there were significant differences between the ventilated group and the non-ventilated control group. Within the ventilated group, both pneumonia rates and mortality were higher and survival times significantly shorter.
conclusionIt has been confirmed for the out-of-hospital setting that the selected ventilation mode has no influence on the pneumonia rate, out-of-hospital survival time and mortality. In addition, with regard to the risks of invasive long-term ventilation, the key finding of this study is that a pressure- or volume-controlled ventilation mode can be selected without weighing additional medical risks and that this mode can also be changed during long-term ventilation. SPONSORSHIP: This study was not funded by a sponsor.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42135505What 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.