Trial reportCritical care (London, England)2026
Ventilator settings for fiberoptic bronchoscopy during mechanical ventilation: a randomized adjudicator-blinded controlled trial VentSetFib.
Trial report in Critical care (London, England), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Standardized low-flow ventilation with PEEP maintenance during bronchoscopy in mechanically ventilated ICU patients: a pilot trial.Journal of intensive care · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDuring bronchoscopy in mechanically ventilated patients, bronchoscope insertion markedly increases airway resistance, elevating peak airway pressure and reducing delivered tidal volume. We sought to determine whether specific ventilator settings (assist volume-controlled with reduced inspiratory flow and tidal volume) lower serious adverse events during flexible fiberoptic bronchoscopy compared with conventional ventilator settings.
methodsSingle-center randomized adjudicator-blinded controlled trial in intubated adult patients undergoing fiberoptic bronchoscopy. Patients were assigned (1:1) to bronchoscopy-optimized settings (inspiratory flow ≤ 25L/min, tidal volume = 5mL/Kg, 1s ≤ inspiratory time ≤ 1.3s, respiratory frequency = 16 breaths/min, positive end-expiratory pressure = 5cmH
resultsThe primary composite endpoint occurred in 1/23 (4%) with optimized settings compared with 22/23 (96%) with conventional settings (risk difference -91.3%; risk ratio 0.05; p < 0.001). Events were driven by ventilatory failure due to pressure-alarm limitation, with lower delivered tidal volume (median 160 vs 400 mL; p < 0.001) and minute ventilation (3.2 vs 7.2 L/min; p < 0.001) under conventional settings. Respiratory and circulatory events were rare and similar between groups (each 1/23 [4%]). Among 19 crossover patients, switching to optimized settings reduced peak airway pressure and restored adequate ventilation.
conclusionsA bronchoscopy-optimized ventilation strategy substantially reduces pressure-alarm-limited ventilation events and enables the delivery of adequate ventilatory support during fiberoptic bronchoscopy.
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.