Trial reportTherapeutic advances in respiratory disease
Comparison of limited driving pressure ventilation and low tidal volume strategies in adults with acute respiratory failure on mechanical ventilation: a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Therapeutic advances in respiratory disease. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04035915 (Comparison Between Limited Driving Pressure Ventilation and Conventional Mechanical Ventilation Strategies in Medical Intensive Care Patients With Acute Respiratory Failure), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Comparison Between Limited Driving Pressure Ventilation and Conventional Mechanical Ventilation Strategies in Medical Intensive Care Patients With Acute Respiratory Failure
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Driving pressure-limited ventilation strategies versus conventional lung protective ventilation strategies for patients with ARDS/ARF: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Critical care (London, England) · 2025Pooled it
- Optimizing Mechanical Ventilation Strategies in ARDS: The Role of Driving Pressure and Low Tidal Volume Ventilation.Critical care research and practice · 2025Review
- The difference between limited driving pressure ventilation and low tidal volume strategies in adults with acute lung failure.Therapeutic advances in respiratory diseaseArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVentilator-induced lung injury (VILI) presents a grave risk to acute respiratory failure patients undergoing mechanical ventilation. Low tidal volume (LTV) ventilation has been advocated as a protective strategy against VILI. However, the effectiveness of limited driving pressure (plateau pressure minus positive end-expiratory pressure) remains unclear.
objectivesThis study evaluated the efficacy of LTV against limited driving pressure in preventing VILI in adults with respiratory failure.
designA single-centre, prospective, open-labelled, randomized controlled trial.
methodsThis study was executed in medical intensive care units at Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand. We enrolled acute respiratory failure patients undergoing intubation and mechanical ventilation. They were randomized in a 1:1 allocation to limited driving pressure (LDP; ⩽15 cmH
resultsFrom July 2019 to December 2020, 126 patients participated, with 63 each in the LDP and LTV groups. The cohorts had the mean (standard deviation) ages of 60.5 (17.6) and 60.9 (17.9) years, respectively, and they exhibited comparable baseline characteristics. The primary reasons for intubation were acute hypoxic respiratory failure (LDP 49.2%, LTV 63.5%) and shock-related respiratory failure (LDP 39.7%, LTV 30.2%). No significant difference emerged in the primary outcome: the median (interquartile range) ALI scores for LDP and LTV were 1.75 (1.00-2.67) and 1.75 (1.25-2.25), respectively (
conclusionsIn adults with acute respiratory failure, the efficacy of LDP and LTV in averting lung injury 7 days post-mechanical ventilation was indistinguishable. CLINICAL
trial registrationThe study was registered with the ClinicalTrials.gov database (identification number NCT04035915).
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.