Nitric oxide : biology and chemistry · 2024
Assessment of continuous low-dose and high-dose burst of inhaled nitric oxide in spontaneously breathing COVID-19 patients: A randomized controlled trial.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеEquivalence TrialПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Kamenshchikov Nikolay O, Safaee Fakhr Bijan, Kravchenko Igor V, Dish Andrey Yu, Podoksenov Yuri K, Kozlov Boris N, Kalashnikova Tatiana P, Tyo Mark A, Anfinogenova Nina D, Boshchenko Alla A, Berra Lorenzo
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Inhaled nitric oxide (iNO) showed to improve oxygenation at low doses by reducing intrapulmonary shunt and to display antiviral properties at high doses. To assess the safety and potential benefits, we designed an exploratory clinical trial comparing low-dose with intermittent high-dose iNO to only intermittent high-dose iNO in hypoxemic COVID-19 patients.
METHODS: In this single-center interventional non-inferiority randomized trial (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04476992), twenty oxygen-dependent COVID-19 patients were randomly assigned to the high-dose (200 ppm for 30 min) + continuous low-dose (20 ppm) iNO group (iNO200/20) or the high-dose iNO group (iNO200). Methemoglobinemia (MetHb) assessed 48 h after iNO initiation was the primary endpoint. Reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction for SARS-CoV-2, inflammatory markers during hospitalization, and heart ultrasounds during the iNO200 treatments were evaluated.
RESULTS: MetHb difference between iNO groups remained within the non-inferiority limit of 3 %, indicating comparable treatments despite being statistically different (p-value<0.01). Both groups presented similar SpO2/FiO2 ratio at 48 h (iNO200 vs. iNO200/20 341[334-356] vs. 359 [331-380], respectively, p-value = 0.436). Both groups showed the same time to SARS-CoV-2 negativization, hospital length of stay, and recovery time. iNO-treated patients showed quicker SARS-CoV-2 negativization compared to a similar group of non-iNO patients (HR 2.57, 95%CI 1.04-6.33). During the 228 treatments, iNO200 and iNO200/20 groups were comparable for safety, hemodynamic stability, and respiratory function improvement.
CONCLUSIONS: iNO200/20 and iNO200 are equally safe in non-intubated patients with COVID-19-induced respiratory failure with regards to MetHb and NO2. Larger studies should investigate whether iNO200/20 leads to better outcomes compared to non-iNO treated patients.
METHODS: In this single-center interventional non-inferiority randomized trial (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04476992), twenty oxygen-dependent COVID-19 patients were randomly assigned to the high-dose (200 ppm for 30 min) + continuous low-dose (20 ppm) iNO group (iNO200/20) or the high-dose iNO group (iNO200). Methemoglobinemia (MetHb) assessed 48 h after iNO initiation was the primary endpoint. Reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction for SARS-CoV-2, inflammatory markers during hospitalization, and heart ultrasounds during the iNO200 treatments were evaluated.
RESULTS: MetHb difference between iNO groups remained within the non-inferiority limit of 3 %, indicating comparable treatments despite being statistically different (p-value<0.01). Both groups presented similar SpO2/FiO2 ratio at 48 h (iNO200 vs. iNO200/20 341[334-356] vs. 359 [331-380], respectively, p-value = 0.436). Both groups showed the same time to SARS-CoV-2 negativization, hospital length of stay, and recovery time. iNO-treated patients showed quicker SARS-CoV-2 negativization compared to a similar group of non-iNO patients (HR 2.57, 95%CI 1.04-6.33). During the 228 treatments, iNO200 and iNO200/20 groups were comparable for safety, hemodynamic stability, and respiratory function improvement.
CONCLUSIONS: iNO200/20 and iNO200 are equally safe in non-intubated patients with COVID-19-induced respiratory failure with regards to MetHb and NO2. Larger studies should investigate whether iNO200/20 leads to better outcomes compared to non-iNO treated patients.