Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22196749›Full record

ArticleBiomedical engineering online2011

Model-based PEEP optimisation in mechanical ventilation.

Yeong Shiong Chiew, J Geoffrey Chase, Geoffrey M Shaw, Ashwath Sundaresan, Thomas Desaive

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biomedical engineering online, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed
4.7field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

32 citing papers in PubMed, 147 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Advances in Machine Learning for Mechanically Ventilated Patients.International journal of general medicine · 2025
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Non-invasive over-distension measurements: data driven vs model-based.Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2023
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Quantifying neonatal patient effort using non-invasive model-based methods.Medical & biological engineering & computing · 2022
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Observational
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Yeong Shiong ChiewDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, University of Canterbury, New Zealand.
J Geoffrey Chase
Geoffrey M Shaw
Ashwath Sundaresan
Thomas Desaive
University of Canterbury · NZChristchurch Hospital · NZUniversity of Liège · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAcute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) patients require mechanical ventilation (MV) for breathing support. Patient-specific PEEP is encouraged for treating different patients but there is no well established method in optimal PEEP selection.

methodsA study of 10 patients diagnosed with ALI/ARDS whom underwent recruitment manoeuvre is carried out. Airway pressure and flow data are used to identify patient-specific constant lung elastance (E lung) and time-variant dynamic lung elastance (E drs) at each PEEP level (increments of 5 cm H2O), for a single compartment linear lung model using integral-based methods. Optimal PEEP is estimated using E lung versus PEEP, Edrs-Pressure curve and E drs Area at minimum elastance (maximum compliance) and the inflection of the curves (diminishing return). Results are compared to clinically selected PEEP values. The trials and use of the data were approved by the New Zealand South Island Regional Ethics Committee.

resultsMedian absolute percentage fitting error to the data when estimating time-variant E drs is 0.9% (IQR = 0.5-2.4) and 5.6% [IQR: 1.8-11.3] when estimating constant E lung. Both E lung and E drs decrease with PEEP to a minimum, before rising, and indicating potential over-inflation. Median E drs over all patients across all PEEP values was 32.2 cmH2O/l [IQR: 26.1-46.6], reflecting the heterogeneity of ALI/ARDS patients, and their response to PEEP, that complicates standard approaches to PEEP selection. All E drs-Pressure curves have a clear inflection point before minimum E drs, making PEEP selection straightforward. Model-based selected PEEP using the proposed metrics were higher than clinically selected values in 7/10 cases.

conclusionContinuous monitoring of the patient-specific E lung and E drs and minimally invasive PEEP titration provide a unique, patient-specific and physiologically relevant metric to optimize PEEP selection with minimal disruption of MV therapy.

Indexed as

Models, BiologicalRespiration, ArtificialAdultAgedAged, 80 and overElasticityFemaleHumansLungMaleMiddle AgedPositive-Pressure RespirationPrecision MedicineRespirationRespiratory Distress SyndromeTime Factors

Identifiers

PMID22196749
PMCPMC3339371
OpenAlexW2058415022

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.