Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29250319›Full record

ReviewF1000Research2017

Patients with uninjured lungs may also benefit from lung-protective ventilator settings.

Roger Alencar, Vittorio D'Angelo, Rachel Carmona, Marcus J Schultz, Ary Serpa Neto

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in F1000Research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Trial
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.

Roger Alencar *Department of Critical Care Medicine, Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein, São Paulo, Brazil.
Vittorio D'Angelo *School of Medicine, Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein, São Paulo, Brazil.
Rachel Carmona *School of Medicine, Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein, São Paulo, Brazil.
Marcus J SchultzDeptartment of Intensive Care, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Ary Serpa NetoDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein, São Paulo, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1520-9387

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although mechanical ventilation is a life-saving strategy in critically ill patients and an indispensable tool in patients under general anesthesia for surgery, it also acts as a double-edged sword. Indeed, ventilation is increasingly recognized as a potentially dangerous intrusion that has the potential to harm lungs, in a condition known as 'ventilator-induced lung injury' (VILI). So-called 'lung-protective' ventilator settings aiming at prevention of VILI have been shown to improve outcomes in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), and, over the last few years, there has been increasing interest in possible benefit of lung-protective ventilation in patients under ventilation for reasons other than ARDS. Patients without ARDS could benefit from tidal volume reduction during mechanical ventilation. However, it is uncertain whether higher levels of positive end-expiratory pressure could benefit these patients as well. Finally, recent evidence suggests that patients without ARDS should receive low driving pressures during ventilation.

Indexed as

acute respiratory distress syndromelung-protective ventilatorventilator–induced lung injury

Identifiers

PMID29250319
PMCPMC5701436

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.