ArticleRespiratory care2024
Respiratory Effects of Maximal Lung Recruitment Maneuvers Using Single-Breath Estimation in ARDS.
Article in Respiratory care, 2024. 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.
- Integrating ultra-prolonged prone ventilation with mechanical power monitoring in refractory acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS): a case report.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Is "Optimized Recruitment" Really Worth the Effort?Respiratory care · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDetermining which patients with ARDS are most likely to benefit from lung recruitment maneuvers is challenging for physicians. The aim of this study was to assess whether the single-breath simplified decremental PEEP maneuver, which evaluates potential lung recruitment, may predict a subject's response to lung recruitment maneuvers, followed by PEEP titration.
methodsWe conducted a pilot prospective single-center cohort study with a 3-step protocol that defined sequential measurements. First, potential lung recruitment was assessed by the single-breath maneuver in the volume controlled mode. Second, the lung recruitment maneuver was performed in the pressure controlled mode, with a fixed driving pressure of 15 cm H
resultsForty-two subjects with moderate-to-severe ARDS were included. The mean ± SD lung recruitment was 149 ± 104 mL. A threshold lung recruitment of 195 mL (area under the receiver operator characteristic curve 0.62, 95% CI 0.43-0.80) predicted a positive response to the maximal lung recruitment maneuver. The lung recruitment maneuver, followed by PEEP titration, resulted in a modification of PEEP in 74% of the subjects. PEEP was increased in more than two thirds of the responders and decreased in almost half of the non-responders to the lung recruitment maneuver. In addition, a decrease in driving pressure and an increase in respiratory system compliance were reported in 62% and 67% of the subjects, respectively.
conclusionsThe single-breath maneuver for evaluating lung recruitability predicted, with poor accuracy, the subjects who responded to the lung recruitment maneuver based on [Formula: see text]/[Formula: see text] improvement. Nevertheless, the lung recruitment maneuver, followed by PEEP titration, improved ventilator settings and respiratory mechanics in a majority of subjects.
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.