Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37081517›Full record

ReviewCritical care (London, England)2023

Practical assessment of risk of VILI from ventilating power: a conceptual model.

John J Marini, Lauren T Thornton, Patricia R M Rocco, Luciano Gattinoni, Philip S Crooke

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Critical care (London, England), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing 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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Mechanical ventilation energy analysis: Recruitment focuses injurious power in the ventilated lung.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Driving pressure in mechanical ventilation: A review.World journal of critical care medicine · 2024
    Review
  12. Review
  13. The Impact of Mechanical Energy Assessment on Mechanical Ventilation: A Comprehensive Review and Practical Application.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2023
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
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.

John J MariniDepartment of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis/St Paul, MN, USA. marin002@umn.edu.
Lauren T ThorntonDepartment of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis/St Paul, MN, USA.
Patricia R M RoccoLaboratory of Pulmonary Investigation, Carlos Chagas Filho Biophysics Institute, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Luciano GattinoniDepartment of Anesthesiology, University of Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany.
Philip S CrookeDepartment of Mathematics, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

At the bedside, assessing the risk of ventilator-induced lung injury (VILI) requires parameters readily measured by the clinician. For this purpose, driving pressure (DP) and end-inspiratory static 'plateau' pressure ([Formula: see text]) of the tidal cycle are unquestionably useful but lack key information relating to associated volume changes and cumulative strain. 'Mechanical power', a clinical term which incorporates all dissipated ('non-elastic') and conserved ('elastic') energy components of inflation, has drawn considerable interest as a comprehensive 'umbrella' variable that accounts for the influence of ventilating frequency per minute as well as the energy cost per tidal cycle. Yet, like the raw values of DP and [Formula: see text], the absolute levels of energy and power by themselves may not carry sufficiently precise information to guide safe ventilatory practice. In previous work we introduced the concept of 'damaging energy per cycle'. Here we describe how-if only in concept-the bedside clinician might gauge the theoretical hazard of delivered energy using easily observed static circuit pressures ([Formula: see text] and positive end expiratory pressure) and an estimate of the maximally tolerated (threshold) non-dissipated ('elastic') airway pressure that reflects the pressure component applied to the alveolar tissues. Because its core inputs are already in use and familiar in daily practice, the simplified mathematical model we propose here for damaging energy and power may promote deeper comprehension of the key factors in play to improve lung protective ventilation.

Indexed as

Respiratory Distress SyndromeVentilator-Induced Lung InjuryHumansModels, TheoreticalRespiration, ArtificialTidal VolumeEnergyLung protectionMathematical modelPowerVentilator-induced lung injury

Identifiers

PMID37081517
PMCPMC10120146

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.