Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33439962›Full record

ArticleJornal brasileiro de pneumologia : publicacao oficial da Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisilogia

Protective mechanical ventilation in patients with risk factors for ARDS: prospective cohort study.

Cristiane Bastos-Netto, Maycon Moura Reboredo, Rodrigo Souza Vieira, Lídia Maria Carneiro da Fonseca, Erich Vidal Carvalho, Marcelo Alcantara Holanda, Bruno Valle Pinheiro

Open access · diamondAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Jornal brasileiro de pneumologia : publicacao oficial da Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisilogia. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Caring for patients at risk of ARDS: the role of driving pressure.Jornal brasileiro de pneumologia : publicacao oficial da Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisilogia · 2021
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Cristiane Bastos-Netto. Núcleo de Pesquisa em Pneumologia e Terapia Intensiva, Universidade Federal de Juiz de Fora, Juiz de Fora (MG) Brasil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1929-0840
Maycon Moura Reboredo. Núcleo de Pesquisa em Pneumologia e Terapia Intensiva, Universidade Federal de Juiz de Fora, Juiz de Fora (MG) Brasil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8155-7414
Rodrigo Souza Vieira. Núcleo de Pesquisa em Pneumologia e Terapia Intensiva, Universidade Federal de Juiz de Fora, Juiz de Fora (MG) Brasil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5273-1022
Lídia Maria Carneiro da Fonseca. Núcleo de Pesquisa em Pneumologia e Terapia Intensiva, Universidade Federal de Juiz de Fora, Juiz de Fora (MG) Brasil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9624-2359
Erich Vidal Carvalho. Núcleo de Pesquisa em Pneumologia e Terapia Intensiva, Universidade Federal de Juiz de Fora, Juiz de Fora (MG) Brasil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9860-1474
Marcelo Alcantara Holanda. Hospital Universitário Walter Cantídio, Universidade Federal do Ceará, Fortaleza (CE) Brasil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6002-0084
Bruno Valle Pinheiro. Núcleo de Pesquisa em Pneumologia e Terapia Intensiva, Universidade Federal de Juiz de Fora, Juiz de Fora (MG) Brasil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5288-3533
Universidade Federal de Juiz de Fora · BRUniversidade Federal do Oeste do Pará · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo evaluate the association that protective mechanical ventilation (MV), based on VT and maximum distending pressure (MDP), has with mortality in patients at risk for ARDS.

methodsThis was a prospective cohort study conducted in an ICU and including 116 patients on MV who had at least one risk factor for the development of ARDS. Ventilatory parameters were collected twice a day for seven days, and patients were divided into two groups (protective MV and nonprotective MV) based on the MDP (difference between maximum airway pressure and PEEP) or VT. The outcome measures were 28-day mortality, ICU mortality, and in-hospital mortality. The risk factors associated with the adoption of nonprotective MV were also assessed.

resultsNonprotective MV based on VT and MDP was applied in 49 (42.2%) and 38 (32.8%) of the patients, respectively. Multivariate Cox regression showed that protective MV based on MDP was associated with lower in-hospital mortality (hazard ratio = 0.37; 95% CI: 0.19-0.73) and lower ICU mortality (hazard ratio = 0.40; 95% CI: 0.19-0.85), after adjustment for age, Simplified Acute Physiology Score 3, and vasopressor use, as well as the baseline values for PaO2/FiO2 ratio, PEEP, pH, and PaCO2. These associations were not observed when nonprotective MV was based on the VT.

conclusionsThe MDP seems to be a useful tool, better than VT, for adjusting MV in patients at risk for ARDS.

Indexed as

Respiration, ArtificialRespiratory Distress SyndromeHumansPositive-Pressure RespirationProspective StudiesRisk Factors

Identifiers

PMID33439962
PMCPMC7889312
OpenAlexW3125053161

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.