The DOI matches its Crossref record; 39 of the 39 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Effect of Helmet Noninvasive Ventilation vs High-Flow Nasal Oxygen on Days Free of Respiratory Support in Patients With COVID-19 and Moderate to Severe Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure: The HENIVOT Randomized Clinical Trial
Open accessAbstract
Importance: High-flow nasal oxygen is recommended as initial treatment for acute hypoxemic respiratory failure and is widely applied in patients with COVID-19. Objective: To assess whether helmet noninvasive ventilation can increase the days free of respiratory support in patients with COVID-19 compared with high-flow nasal oxygen alone. Design, Setting, and Participants: Multicenter randomized clinical trial in 4 intensive care units (ICUs) in Italy between October and December 2020, end of follow-up February 11, 2021, including 109 patients with COVID-19 and moderate to severe hypoxemic respiratory failure (ratio of partial pressure of arterial oxygen to fraction of inspired oxygen ≤200). Interventions: Participants were randomly assigned to receive continuous treatment with helmet noninvasive ventilation (positive end-expiratory pressure, 10-12 cm H2O; pressure support, 10-12 cm H2O) for at least 48 hours eventually followed by high-flow nasal oxygen (n = 54) or high-flow oxygen alone (60 L/min) (n = 55). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the number of days free of respiratory support within 28 days after enrollment. Secondary outcomes included the proportion of patients who required endotracheal intubation within 28 days from study enrollment, the number of days free of invasive mechanical ventilation at day 28, the number of days free of invasive mechanical ventilation at day 60, in-ICU mortality, in-hospital mortality, 28-day mortality, 60-day mortality, ICU length of stay, and hospital length of stay. Results: Among 110 patients who were randomized, 109 (99%) completed the trial (median age, 65 years [interquartile range {IQR}, 55-70]; 21 women [19%]). The median days free of respiratory support within 28 days after randomization were 20 (IQR, 0-25) in the helmet group and 18 (IQR, 0-22) in the high-flow nasal oxygen group, a difference that was not statistically significant (mean difference, 2 days [95% CI, -2 to 6]; P = .26). Of 9 prespecified secondary outcomes reported, 7 showed no significant difference. The rate of endotracheal intubation was significantly lower in the helmet group than in the high-flow nasal oxygen group (30% vs 51%; difference, -21% [95% CI, -38% to -3%]; P = .03). The median number of days free of invasive mechanical ventilation within 28 days was significantly higher in the helmet group than in the high-flow nasal oxygen group (28 [IQR, 13-28] vs 25 [IQR 4-28]; mean difference, 3 days [95% CI, 0-7]; P = .04). The rate of in-hospital mortality was 24% in the helmet group and 25% in the high-flow nasal oxygen group (absolute difference, -1% [95% CI, -17% to 15%]; P > .99). Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with COVID-19 and moderate to severe hypoxemia, treatment with helmet noninvasive ventilation, compared with high-flow nasal oxygen, resulted in no significant difference in the number of days free of respiratory support within 28 days. Further research is warranted to determine effects on other outcomes, including the need for endotracheal intubation. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04502576.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Grasselli, G., Zangrillo, A., Zanella, A., Antonelli, M., Cabrini, L., Castelli, A., Cereda, D., Coluccello, A., Foti, G., Fumagalli, R., et al. (2020) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2020.5394 · Cited by 5,469
Self-citationHigh-Flow Oxygen through Nasal Cannula in Acute Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure
Frat, J.-P., Thille, A. W., Mercat, A., Girault, C., Ragot, S., Perbet, S., Prat, G., Boulain, T., Morawiec, E., Cottereau, A., et al. (2015) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa1503326 · Cited by 2,342
One-Year Outcomes in Survivors of the Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome
Herridge, M. S., Cheung, A. M., Tansey, C. M., Matte-Martyn, A., Diaz-Granados, N., Al-Saidi, F., Cooper, A. B., Guest, C. B., Mazer, C. D., Mehta, S., et al. (2003) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa022450 · Cited by 2,334
Weaning from mechanical ventilation
Boles, J.-M., Bion, J., Connors, A., Herridge, M., Marsh, B., Melot, C., Pearl, R., Silverman, H., Stanchina, M., Vieillard-Baron, A., et al. (2007) · European Respiratory Journal · doi:10.1183/09031936.00010206 · Cited by 2,064
Official ERS/ATS clinical practice guidelines: noninvasive ventilation for acute respiratory failure
Rochwerg, B., Brochard, L., Elliott, M. W., Hess, D., Hill, N. S., Nava, S., Navalesi, P., Antonelli, M., Brozek, J., Conti, G., et al. (2017) · European Respiratory Journal · doi:10.1183/13993003.02426-2016 · Cited by 1,668 · cited 1×
“Diastolic 70 (63-75) 70 (61-90) Dyspnea at enrollmentd 4 (2-7) 4 (1-6) Device-related discomfort at enrollmentd 0 (0-4) 0 (0-1)”
Self-citationFan, E., Del Sorbo, L., Goligher, E. C., Hodgson, C. L., Munshi, L., Walkey, A. J., Adhikari, N. K. J., Amato, M. B. P., Branson, R., Brower, R. G., et al. (2017) · American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine · doi:10.1164/rccm.201703-0548st · Cited by 1,630
Self-citationMechanical Ventilation to Minimize Progression of Lung Injury in Acute Respiratory Failure
Brochard, L., Slutsky, A., & Pesenti, A. (2017) · American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine · doi:10.1164/rccm.201605-1081cp · Cited by 1,274
Hilbert, G., Gruson, D., Vargas, F., Valentino, R., Gbikpi-Benissan, G., Dupon, M., Reiffers, J., & Cardinaud, J. P. (2001) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm200102153440703 · Cited by 1,045
Antonelli, M., Conti, G., Rocco, M., Bufi, M., De Blasi, R. A., Vivino, G., Gasparetto, A., & Meduri, G. U. (1998) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm199808133390703 · Cited by 1,014
Self-citationCOVID-ICU Group on behalf of the REVA Network and the COVID-ICU Investigators (2021) · Intensive Care Medicine · doi:10.1007/s00134-020-06294-x · Cited by 924
Cited by
Surviving Sepsis campaign: international guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock 2026
Prescott, H. C., Antonelli, M., Alhazzani, W., Møller, M. H., Alshamsi, F., Azevedo, L. C. P., Belley-Cote, E., De Waele, J., Derde, L., Dionne, J. C., et al. (2026) · Critical Care Medicine · doi:10.1097/ccm.0000000000007075 · Cited by 117
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Grieco, D. L., Menga, L. S., Cesarano, M., Rosà, T., Spadaro, S., Bitondo, M. M., Montomoli, J., Falò, G., Tonetti, T., Cutuli, S. L., Pintaudi, G., Tanzarella, E. S., Piervincenzi, E., Bongiovanni, F., Dell’Anna, A. M., Delle Cese, L., Berardi, C., Carelli, S., Bocci, M. G., Montini, L., Bello, G., Natalini, D., De Pascale, G., Velardo, M., Volta, C. A., Ranieri, V. M., Conti, G., Maggiore, S. M., Antonelli, M., COVID-ICU Gemelli Study Group, Anzellotti, G. M., Cascarano, L., Ceccaroni, F., De Santis, P., Di Muro, M., Durante, M., Filetici, N., Gennenzi, V., Gullì, A., Lombardi, G., Maccaglia, A., Maviglia, R., Mele, A., Mercurio, G., Michi, T., Morena, T. C., Murdolo, M., Pennisi, M. A., Postorino, S., Potalivo, A., Pozzana, F., Rubino, C., Savino, M., Scarascia, R., Scavone, A., Settanni, D., Silva, S., Torrini, F., Vargas, J., & Zaccone, C.
- Venue
- JAMA
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 2021-05-04
- Volume
- 325
- Issue
- 17
- Pages
- 1731
- ISSN
- 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
- 0098-7484
- OpenAlex
- W3137551872
- Cited by
- 473
- References
- 39
- FWCI
- 55.60
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Effect of Helmet Noninvasive Ventilation vs High-Flow Nasal Oxygen on Days Free of Respiratory Support in Patients With COVID-19 and Moderate to Severe Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure: The HENIVOT Randomized Clinical Trial. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.2021.4682
- The paper
- Grieco, D. L., Menga, L. S., Cesarano, M., Rosà, T., Spadaro, S., Bitondo, M. M., Montomoli, J., Falò, G., Tonetti, T., Cutuli, S. L., Pintaudi, G., Tanzarella, E. S., Piervincenzi, E., Bongiovanni, F., Dell’Anna, A. M., Delle Cese, L., Berardi, C., Carelli, S., Bocci, M. G., . . . Zaccone, C. (2021). Effect of Helmet Noninvasive Ventilation vs High-Flow Nasal Oxygen on Days Free of Respiratory Support in Patients With COVID-19 and Moderate to Severe Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure: The HENIVOT Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2021.4682
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.