ReviewCurrent opinion in critical care2019
Bedside respiratory physiology to detect risk of lung injury in acute respiratory distress syndrome.
Review in Current opinion in critical care, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of two transpulmonary pressure-based positive end-expiratory pressure titration strategies in acute respiratory distress syndrome: a randomized crossover study.Critical care (London, England) · 2025Trial
- Mechanical ventilation activates PERK/eIF2α and NOD1 pathways that contribute to NF-κB-driven inflammation in VILI.Respiratory research · 2026Article
- Mechanical power of ventilation: tracking the damaging component.Critical care (London, England) · 2026Review
- Evaluating the generalisability of formulas used to set tidal volumes in mechanically ventilated patients: an observational, multicohort, retrospective study.The Lancet. Respiratory medicine · 2025Observational
- Correlation of sonographic and radiographic scores of lung edema and metrics of shunt, dead space, and respiratory mechanics in invasively ventilated patients.Critical care science · 2025Observational
- Article
- Mechanical power of ventilation and driving pressure: two undervalued parameters for pre extracorporeal membrane oxygenation ventilation and during daily management?Critical care (London, England) · 2023Review
- Advancing precision medicine for acute respiratory distress syndrome.The Lancet. Respiratory medicine · 2022Review
- Phenotypes and personalized medicine in the acute respiratory distress syndrome.Intensive care medicine · 2020Review
- Hypoxemia on life support for guiding acute respiratory distress syndrome therapy?Journal of thoracic disease · 2020Article
- Lung protection in acute respiratory distress syndrome: what should we target?Current opinion in critical care · 2020Article
- Emerging concepts in ventilation-induced lung injury.F1000Research · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
purpose of reviewThe most effective strategies for treating the patient with acute respiratory distress syndrome center on minimizing ventilation-induced lung injury (VILI). Yet, current standard-of-care does little to modify mechanical ventilation to patient-specific risk. This review focuses on evaluation of bedside respiratory mechanics, which when interpreted in patient-specific context, affords opportunity to individualize lung-protective ventilation in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome. RECENT
findingsFour biophysical mechanisms of VILI are widely accepted: volutrauma, barotrauma, atelectrauma, and stress concentration. Resulting biotrauma, that is, local and systemic inflammation and endothelial activation, may be thought of as the final common pathway that propagates VILI-mediated multiorgan failure. Conventional, widely utilized techniques to assess VILI risk rely on airway pressure, flow, and volume changes, and remain essential tools for determining overdistension of aerated lung regions, particularly when interpreted cognizant of their limitations. Emerging bedside tools identify regional differences in mechanics, but further study is required to identify how they might best be incorporated into clinical practice. SUMMARY: Quantifying patient-specific risk of VILI requires understanding each patient's pulmonary mechanics in context of biological predisposition. Tailoring support at bedside according to these factors affords the greatest opportunity to date for mitigating VILI and alleviating associated morbidity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.