Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35655856›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in medicine2022

Time-Controlled Adaptive Ventilation Does Not Induce Hemodynamic Impairment in a Swine ARDS Model.

Mickael Lescroart, Benjamin Pequignot, Laurent Bitker, Héloïse Pina, N'Guyen Tran, Jean-Louis Hébert, Jean-Christophe Richard, Bruno Lévy, Matthieu Koszutski

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2022. 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
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 26% 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

9 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Mickael LescroartCHRU Nancy, Service de Médecine Intensive et Réanimation, Hôpital Brabois, Vandœuvre-lès-Nancy, France.
Benjamin PequignotCHRU Nancy, Service de Médecine Intensive et Réanimation, Hôpital Brabois, Vandœuvre-lès-Nancy, France.
Laurent BitkerService de Médecine Intensive - Réanimation, Hôpital de la Croix-Rousse, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Lyon, France.
Héloïse PinaCHRU de Nancy, Département D'Anatomie Pathologique, Laboratoires de Biologie Médicale et de Biopathologie, Hôpital Brabois, Vandœuvre-lès-Nancy, France.
N'Guyen TranUniversité de Lorraine, Faculté de Médecine, Nancy, France.
Jean-Louis HébertUniversité Paris XI, Institut de Cardiologie, Groupe Hospitalier Pitié-Salpêtrière, Paris, France.
Jean-Christophe RichardService de Médecine Intensive - Réanimation, Hôpital de la Croix-Rousse, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Lyon, France.
Bruno LévyCHRU Nancy, Service de Médecine Intensive et Réanimation, Hôpital Brabois, Vandœuvre-lès-Nancy, France.
Matthieu KoszutskiCHRU Nancy, Service de Médecine Intensive et Réanimation, Hôpital Brabois, Vandœuvre-lès-Nancy, France.
Centre Hospitalier Régional et Universitaire de Nancy · FRUniversité de Lorraine · FRHôpital de la Croix-Rousse · FRHospices Civils de Lyon · FRUniversité Paris-Saclay · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The current standard of care during severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is based on low tidal volume (VT) ventilation, at 6 mL/kg of predicted body weight. The time-controlled adaptive ventilation (TCAV) is an alternative strategy, based on specific settings of the airway pressure release ventilation (APRV) mode. Briefly, TCAV reduces lung injury, including: (1) an improvement in alveolar recruitment and homogeneity; (2) reduction in alveolar and alveolar duct micro-strain and stress-risers. TCAV can result in higher intra-thoracic pressures and thus impair hemodynamics resulting from heart-lung interactions. The objective of our study was to compare hemodynamics between TCAV and conventional protective ventilation in a porcine ARDS model. Methods: In 10 pigs (63-73 kg), lung injury was induced by repeated bronchial saline lavages followed by 2 h of injurious ventilation. The animals were then randomized into two groups: (1) Conventional protective ventilation with a VT of 6 mL/kg and PEEP adjusted to a plateau pressure set between 28 and 30 cmH Results: Both lung elastance and PaO Conclusion: No hemodynamic adverse events were observed in the TCAV group compared as to the standard protective ventilation group in this swine ARDS model, and TCAV appeared to be beneficial to the respiratory system.

Indexed as

APRVARDSheart-lung interactionshemodynamicmechanical ventilationTCAV

Identifiers

PMID35655856
PMCPMC9152423
OpenAlexW4280576684

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.