Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38796447›Full record

ReviewCritical care (London, England)2024

Transpulmonary pressure monitoring in critically ill patients: pros and cons.

Lorenzo Ball, Daniel Talmor, Paolo Pelosi

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Critical care (London, England), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing 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

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Impact of Baydur ratio correction on the reliability of esophageal pressure measurement.Journal of applied physiology (Bethesda, Md. : 1985) · 2026
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Novel murine partial tracheal occlusion model with altered respiratory dynamics.American journal of physiology. Lung cellular and molecular physiology · 2025
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Observational
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Lorenzo BallDepartment of Surgical Sciences and Integrated Diagnostics (DISC), University of Genoa, Viale Benedetto XV 16, Genoa, Italy. lorenzo.ball@unige.it.
Daniel TalmorDepartment of Anesthesia, Critical Care, and Pain Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Paolo PelosiDepartment of Surgical Sciences and Integrated Diagnostics (DISC), University of Genoa, Viale Benedetto XV 16, Genoa, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The use of transpulmonary pressure monitoring based on measurement of esophageal pressure has contributed importantly to the personalization of mechanical ventilation based on respiratory pathophysiology in critically ill patients. However, esophageal pressure monitoring is still underused in the clinical practice. This technique allows partitioning of the respiratory mechanics between the lungs and the chest wall, provides information on lung recruitment and risk of barotrauma, and helps titrating mechanical ventilation settings in patients with respiratory failure. In assisted ventilation modes and during non-invasive respiratory support, esophageal pressure monitoring provides important information on the inspiratory effort and work of breathing. Nonetheless, several controversies persist on technical aspects, interpretation and clinical decision-making based on values derived from this monitoring technique. The aim of this review is to summarize the physiological bases of esophageal pressure monitoring, discussing the pros and cons of its clinical applications and different interpretations in critically ill patients undergoing invasive and non-invasive respiratory support.

Indexed as

Critical IllnessHumansMonitoring, PhysiologicRespiration, ArtificialRespiratory MechanicsARDSEsophageal pressureTranspulmonary pressure

Identifiers

PMID38796447
PMCPMC11127359

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.