2016
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd004085.pub4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

High-frequency oscillatory ventilation versus conventional ventilation for acute respiratory distress syndrome

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
35
0
2

Year Published

2016
2016
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 43 publications
(37 citation statements)
references
References 90 publications
0
35
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…36 However, it may be best to avoid high-frequency oscillatory ventilation in patients with COVID-19 due to concerns of aerosol generation. 19,37,38 High-frequency oscillatory ventilation has not been used amid this outbreak in Wuhan. Pressure-regulated volume control ventilation, although increasingly popular in the perioperative arena, has not gained momentum in ICUs due to the lack of evidence for its outcome benefits.…”
Section: Ventilation Managementmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…36 However, it may be best to avoid high-frequency oscillatory ventilation in patients with COVID-19 due to concerns of aerosol generation. 19,37,38 High-frequency oscillatory ventilation has not been used amid this outbreak in Wuhan. Pressure-regulated volume control ventilation, although increasingly popular in the perioperative arena, has not gained momentum in ICUs due to the lack of evidence for its outcome benefits.…”
Section: Ventilation Managementmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…4,5 Additionally, a review of HFOV use found no reduction in mortality or ventilator free days when compared to conventional ventilation. 6 Despite this data, HFOV continues to be used in the setting of severe respiratory failure in children.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In a recent systematic review included 10 randomized controlled trials studying the use of HFO versus CMV in moderate and severe ARDS in adult patients, there was no significant difference in hospital or 30-day mortality between both groups 33 .…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%