Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39825438›Full record

SynthesisCritical care (London, England)2025

Individualized PEEP titration by lung compliance during one-lung ventilation: a meta-analysis.

Wan-Jie Gu, Feng-Zhi Zhao, Federico Piccioni, Rui Shi, Xiang Si, Shuo Chen, Maurizio Cecconi, Hai-Yan Yin

Abstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Critical care (London, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
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

8 authors.

Wan-Jie Gu *Department of Intensive Care Unit, The First Affiliated Hospital of Jinan University, Guangzhou, China.
Feng-Zhi Zhao *Department of Intensive Care Unit, The First Affiliated Hospital of Jinan University, Guangzhou, China.
Federico Piccioni *Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Milan, Italy.
Rui ShiDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, China.
Xiang SiDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, China.
Shuo ChenLibrary of Graduate School, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing, China.
Maurizio CecconiDepartment of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Milan, Italy. maurizio.cecconi@hunimed.eu.
Hai-Yan YinDepartment of Intensive Care Unit, The First Affiliated Hospital of Jinan University, Guangzhou, China. haiyanyin1867@126.com.

Funding

National Natural Science Foundation of China 82072232Science and Technology Program of Guangzhou, China 202201020028Special Projects in Key Areas of General Colleges and Universities in Guangdong Province 2022ZDZX2003
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite the physiological advantages of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP), its optimal utilization during one-lung ventilation (OLV) remains uncertain. We aimed to investigate whether individualized PEEP titration by lung compliance is associated with a reduced risk of postoperative pulmonary complications during OLV.

methodsWe searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials until April 1, 2024, to identify published randomized controlled trials that compared individualized PEEP titration by lung compliance with fixed PEEP during OLV. The primary outcome was a composite of postoperative pulmonary complications. Secondary outcomes included clinical outcomes (pneumonia, atelectasis, ARDS, cardiovascular complications, mortality), respiratory mechanics, gas exchanges, and hemodynamic variables. Subgroup analyses were conducted for the primary outcome according to the PEEP titration method (dynamic compliance vs. driving pressure/static compliance, stepwise decremental vs. incremental strategy).

resultsTen trials involving 3426 patients were included. Compared with fixed PEEP, individualized PEEP titration by lung compliance was associated with reduced risk of a composite of postoperative pulmonary complications (eight trials, 3351 patients, risk ratio [RR] 0.55, 95% CI 0.38-0.78). Subgroup analyses suggested the association was evident in the subgroup with titration by dynamic compliance rather than driving pressure/static compliance and in the subgroup with PEEP titration by stepwise decremental but not stepwise incremental strategy. Individualized PEEP titration by lung compliance was also associated with a reduced risk of pneumonia (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.52-0.96) and atelectasis (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.45-0.88), higher dynamic compliance, PaO

conclusionsCompared with fixed PEEP, individualized PEEP titration by lung compliance is associated with a reduced risk of postoperative pulmonary complications during OLV, especially in PEEP titration by dynamic compliance or stepwise decremental strategy. It improves respiratory mechanics and oxygenation with no difference in hemodynamic variables. Trial registration number ClinicalTrials.gov (PROSPERO No. CRD42024529980).

Indexed as

One-Lung VentilationPositive-Pressure RespirationHumansLung ComplianceLung complianceOne-lung ventilationPositive end-expiratory pressurePostoperative pulmonary complicationsRespiratory mechanics

Identifiers

PMID39825438
PMCPMC11740579

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.