Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40839096›Full record

Trial reportIntensive care medicine2025

Personalized driving pressure-guided positive end-expiratory pressure in patients at risk of postoperative respiratory failure (IMPROVE-2): a multicenter, pragmatic, randomized clinical trial.

Emmanuel Futier, Audrey De Jong, Cédric Cirenei, Thomas Godet, Matthieu Jabaudon, Jean-Michel Constantin, Nicolas Grillot, Pierre Bouzat, Lois Henry, Dimitri Margetis and 6 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled TrialPragmatic Clinical Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Intensive care medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03987789 (Intraoperative Protective Mechanical Ventilation in Patients Requiring Emergency Abdominal Surgery), which is not on this map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing 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.

NCT03987789 nacompletednot on this map

Intraoperative Protective Mechanical Ventilation in Patients Requiring Emergency Abdominal Surgery: IMPROVE-2 Multicenter Prospective Randomized Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity Hospital, Clermont-FerrandRan2021 to 2022Enrolled707ConditionsEmergency Abdominal Surgery, Mechanical Ventilation, General Anesthesia, Postoperative MorbidityArmsDriving-pressure-guided group, Low PEEP
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Is postoperative ARDS different from medical ARDS?Critical care (London, England) · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

16 authors.

Emmanuel Futier *Département de Médecine Périopératoire, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) Clermont-Ferrand, Anesthésie Réanimation, Hôpital Estaing, Clermont-Ferrand, France. efutier@chu-clermontferrand.fr.ORCID 0000-0002-6454-271X
Audrey De JongDépartement Anesthésie Réanimation B, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) Montpellier, Hôpital Saint Eloi, PhyMedExp, Université de Montpellier, INSERM U1046, Montpellier, France.
Cédric CireneiCentre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) Lille, Pôle Anesthésie Réanimation, Hôpital Claude Huriez, Université Lille, ULR 7365-GRITA, Lille, France.
Thomas GodetDépartement de Médecine Périopératoire, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) Clermont-Ferrand, Anesthésie Réanimation, Hôpital Estaing, Clermont-Ferrand, France.
Matthieu JabaudonDépartement de Médecine Périopératoire, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) Clermont-Ferrand, Anesthésie Réanimation, Hôpital Estaing, Clermont-Ferrand, France.
Jean-Michel ConstantinDépartement Anesthésie Réanimation, Sorbonne Université, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Hôpital La Pitié-Salpêtrière, DMU DREAM, Paris, France.
Nicolas GrillotNantes Université, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) Nantes, Service Anesthésie Réanimation Chirurgicale, INSERM CIC, 0004 Immunologie Et Infectiologie, Nantes, France.
Pierre BouzatDépartement Anesthésie Réanimation, Université Grenoble Alpes, Inserm U-1216, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) Grenoble Alpes, Grenoble, France.
Lois HenryCentre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) Lille, Pôle Urgence, Hôpital Roger Salengro, Lille, France.
Dimitri MargetisDépartement Anesthésie Réanimation, Sorbonne Université, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Hôpital La Pitié-Salpêtrière, DMU DREAM, Paris, France.
Gilles LebuffeCentre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) Lille, Pôle Anesthésie Réanimation, Hôpital Claude Huriez, Université Lille, ULR 7365-GRITA, Lille, France.
Marc GarnierDépartement de Médecine Périopératoire, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) Clermont-Ferrand, Anesthésie Réanimation, Hôpital Estaing, Clermont-Ferrand, France.
Céline LambertCentre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) Clermont-Ferrand, Biostatistics Unit, Direction de La Recherche Clinique (DRCI), Clermont-Ferrand, France.
Bruno PereiraCentre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) Clermont-Ferrand, Biostatistics Unit, Direction de La Recherche Clinique (DRCI), Clermont-Ferrand, France.
Samir Jaber *Département Anesthésie Réanimation B, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) Montpellier, Hôpital Saint Eloi, PhyMedExp, Université de Montpellier, INSERM U1046, Montpellier, France.
IMPROVE-2 Trial investigators

Funding

Direction Générale de l'offre de Soins 16-0027
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeAirway driving pressure has garnered considerable attention for lung-protective ventilation. We evaluated the clinical effectiveness of airway driving pressure as a target to individualize positive-end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) setting in mechanically ventilated patients at risk for postoperative respiratory failure.

methodsWe conducted a multicenter, pragmatic, assessor-masked, randomized trial among adult patients undergoing emergency abdominal surgery in 22 hospitals in France. Patients were assigned 1:1 to receive individually adjusted highest PEEP targeting a driving pressure < 13 cmH

resultsThe primary outcome occurred in 87 out of 338 (25.7%) intervention patients and in 69 out of 341 (20.2%) control patients (difference, 5.5%; 95% confidence interval [CI] - 0.8 to 11.8; relative risk, 1.27; 95%CI 0.96-1.68; p = 0.08). The difference was primarily due to an increased incidence of reintubation or need for curative non-invasive ventilation among intervention patients (difference, 7.1%; 95% CI 2.5-11.9; relative risk, 1.97; 95% CI 1.24-3.11; p = 0.004). Other secondary outcomes did not differ.

conclusionAmong patients at risk for postoperative respiratory failure after emergency abdominal surgery, a strategy of individually adjusted highest PEEP in targeting driving pressure lower than 13 cmH

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03987789.

Indexed as

Positive-Pressure RespirationPostoperative ComplicationsRespiratory InsufficiencyAgedFemaleFranceHumansMaleMiddle AgedClinical trialEmergency surgeryMechanical ventilationPostoperative respiratory failure

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.