ArticleAmerican journal of translational research2025
Functional residual capacity and elastic power as prognostic markers in acute respiratory distress syndrome.
Article in American journal of translational research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo determine if functional residual capacity (FRC) and elastic power (EP) could predict outcomes in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS).
methodsThis retrospective study included 353 ARDS patients admitted to our hospital between 2018 and 2025. Patients were categorized into good (n=251) and poor (n=102) prognosis groups based on their 28-day outcomes. FRC was measured using nitrogen washout, and EP was calculated using the formula: 0.098 × VT × RR × ½(PEEP + Pplat). After comparing these parameters between groups, multivariate regression and ROC analyses were performed to identify predictors. We validated our findings in an external cohort of 101 patients.
resultsPoor outcome patients had significantly lower FRC and higher EP (both P<0.001). A positive correlation between EP and mortality was observed (rho=0.298, P<0.001), while FRC showed a significant inverse relationship (rho=-0.177, P<0.001). Multivariate analysis confirmed that EP (OR=1.251, P<0.001), FRC (OR=0.956, P=0.039), ARDS severity (OR=8.421, P<0.001), and PEEP (OR=1.338, P=0.011) were independent predictors of outcomes. A predictive model combining FRC and EP showed strong performance, with an AUC of 0.809 in internal validation and 0.819 in the external cohort. EP alone exhibited a high specificity of 0.944 at a cutoff value of 21.535 J/min.
conclusionsARDS patients with low FRC and high EP face an increased risk of mortality. Combining these measures enhances prognostic accuracy and can help tailor ventilation strategies for improved outcomes.
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.