ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2023
Lung Ultrasound to Determine the Effect of Lower vs. Higher PEEP on Lung Aeration in Patients without ARDS-A Substudy of a Randomized Clinical Trial.
Article in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Lung ultrasound in the management of mechanical ventilation in pediatric critical care: a narrative review.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2025Review
- 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
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 5 institutions in 7 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundVentilation with lower positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) may cause loss of lung aeration in critically ill invasively ventilated patients. This study investigated whether a systematic lung ultrasound (LUS) scoring system can detect such changes in lung aeration in a study comparing lower versus higher PEEP in invasively ventilated patients without acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS).
methodsSingle center substudy of a national, multicenter, randomized clinical trial comparing lower versus higher PEEP ventilation strategy. Fifty-seven patients underwent a systematic 12-region LUS examination within 12 h and between 24 to 48 h after start of invasive ventilation, according to randomization. The primary endpoint was a change in the global LUS aeration score, where a higher value indicates a greater impairment in lung aeration.
resultsThirty-three and twenty-four patients received ventilation with lower PEEP (median PEEP 1 (0-5) cm H
conclusionsIn this substudy of a randomized clinical trial comparing lower PEEP versus higher PEEP in patients without ARDS, LUS was unable to detect changes in lung aeration.
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.