To the Editor,

Inhaled nitric oxide (iNO) is widely used to treat hypoxic patients, especially those with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) [1]. We read with great interest the study by Isha et al. investigating the therapeutic efficacy of low-dose iNO in patients with COVID-19 [2]. Although this study provides valuable insights into this therapeutic approach, several considerations merit detailed discussion.

The factors that influence the effectiveness of iNO include patient population heterogeneity, and previous multicenter studies have reported response rates ranging from 20 to 60% [3]. Similar differences are observed in COVID-19 patients, possibly due to biological factors, such as such as the suppressed endogenous nitric oxide, across various populations [4]. In Isha’s study, the authors used multiple levels of categorization. This included initial grouping based on breathing status (spontaneous vs. intubated), followed by subdivisions considering factors such as progression to intubation, iNO usage, the timing of iNO initiation (pre- or post-intubation), early intubation (< 5 days), and iNO use for more than 48 h before intubation. However, the absence of patient-self stratification, along with a complex system that focused on the type of respiratory support, posed significant challenges to interpreting the results. Additionally, this extensive stratification likely resulted in small subgroup sizes, which may have compromised statistical power. Future trials should focus on well-defined patient subgroups, rather than on broad, heterogeneous populations.

The effect of iNO on oxygenation varies over time, making the duration of iNO treatment an important factor. Long-term iNO inhalation can lead to time-dependent changes in drug effects, with patients gradually developing stronger responses to lower doses of NO [5]. In Isha’s study, the duration of iNO administration was not specified, especially for those in the spontaneously breathing group who received iNO before intubation. It is unclear whether these patients continued iNO treatment after intubation, which could affect the results.

The response criteria for iNO in hypoxic patients are crucial. The widely accepted criterion for iNO effectiveness is a 20% increase in PaO₂, PaO₂/FiO₂, or the oxygenation index (within 30 min to 1 h after iNO initiation), which serves as a reliable indicator for evaluating the immediate treatment effect [5, 6]. In contrast, the authors defined a response as an increase in PaO2/FiO2 or a decrease in FiO2 within 48 h. This 48-h extended assessment and the uncertainty in the range of oxygenation enhancement may have influenced the estimation of immediate physiological responses to iNO, potentially affecting the interpretation of outcomes, particularly in the absence of iNO duration data.

Finally, we appreciate the authors' efforts in conducting this research. While iNO showed a positive impact, and future studies should focus on well-defined patient populations, clearly documented iNO administration durations, and precise response criteria to more accurately evaluate the therapeutic benefits of iNO.

Sincerely,

No datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.

1. Liu K, Wang H, Yu SJ, et al. Inhaled pulmonary vasodilators: a narrative review. Ann Transl Med. 2021;9(7):597.

   Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

2. Isha S, Balasubramanian P, Hanson AJ, et al. Impact of low dose inhaled nitric oxide treatment in spontaneously breathing and intubated COVID-19 patients: a retrospective propensity-matched study. Crit Care. 2024;28(1):344.

   Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

3. Griffiths MJ, Evans TW. Inhaled nitric oxide therapy in adults. N Engl J Med. 2005;353(25):2683–95.

   Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

4. Shetty NS, Giammatteo V, Gaonkar M, et al. Differences in the response to high-dose inhaled nitric oxide in self-identified black and white individuals: a Post Hoc analysis of the NOSARSCOVID randomized clinical trial. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2024;209(7):887–90.

   Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

5. Gerlach H, Keh D, Semmerow A, et al. Dose-response characteristics during long-term inhalation of nitric oxide in patients with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome: a prospective, randomized, controlled study. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2003;167(7):1008–15.

   Article PubMed Google Scholar

6. DiBlasi RM, Myers TR, Hess DR. Evidence-based clinical practice guideline: inhaled nitric oxide for neonates with acute hypoxic respiratory failure. Respir Care. 2010;55(12):1717–45.

   PubMed Google Scholar

Download references

None.

Not applicable.

1. Kai Liu and Shi-Min Zhang have contributed equally to this work.

Authors and Affiliations

1. Department of Critical Care Medicine, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, No. 180 Fenglin Road, Xuhui District, Shanghai, 200032, China

   Kai Liu, Shi-Min Zhang & Min-jie Ju

2. Department of Critical Care Medicine, Sichuan Academy of Medical Sciences and Sichuan Provincial People’s Hospital, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, 610072, China

   Jing-chao Luo

1. Kai LiuView author publications

   You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

2. Shi-Min ZhangView author publications

   You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

3. Jing-chao LuoView author publications

   You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

4. Min-jie JuView author publications

   You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Supervision: Min-jie Ju, Jing-chao Luo. Writing—original draft: Kai Liu. Shi-ming Zhang. Writing—review and editing: Min-jie Ju, Jing-chao Luo, Kai Liu.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Jing-chao Luo or Min-jie Ju.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

Reprints and permissions

Cite this article

Liu, K., Zhang, SM., Luo, Jc. et al. Inhaled nitric oxide clinical confusions: population types, duration, and responsiveness. Crit Care 28, 384 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-024-05181-x

Download citation

• Received: 14 November 2024

• Accepted: 18 November 2024

• Published: 25 November 2024

• DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-024-05181-x

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative