Trial reportCritical care (London, England)2026
End-inspiratory pause enhances ventilation efficiency without increasing autoPEEP in patients with COPD during controlled ventilation.
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. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionEnd-inspiratory pause (EIP) is traditionally discouraged in mechanically ventilated patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) because it shortens expiratory time (TE) and may worsen hyperinflation. Previous data in hypoxemic patients suggest that, at equal total inspiratory time (TI), shorter insufflations followed by EIP can improve CO₂ elimination. Whether this strategy is effective and safe in obstructive lung disease remains unknown.
objectiveTo evaluate whether a ventilation with high inspiratory flow and EIP reduces arterial carbon dioxide (PaCO₂) without increasing hyperinflation in mechanically ventilated patients with COPD undergoing controlled hypoventilation.
methodsProspective, single-center, randomized, cross-over physiological study including sedated, intubated adult patients with acute exacerbation of COPD, PaCO₂ ≥45 mmHg, and no spontaneous respiratory effort. Patients were randomized to two 30-minute ventilation strategies in volume-controlled mode: conventional ventilation without EIP (VentNO−PAUSE) and ventilation with EIP (VentPAUSE), in which inspiratory flow was increased and 40–50% of TI was replaced by an EIP. Total TI and TE were identical in both strategies. Arterial blood gases, respiratory mechanics, and hemodynamics were recorded.
resultsVentPAUSE significantly reduced PaCO₂ (58.5 ± 9.4 to 52.6 ± 10.4 mmHg; P < 0.001) and increased arterial pH (7.31 ± 0.09 to 7.34 ± 0.08; P < 0.001). Ventilatory ratio decreased (P < 0.001), indicating improved ventilatory efficiency. Oxygenation improved (PaO₂ and PaO₂/FiO₂; P < 0.05), while the alveolar–to–arterial oxygen difference was unchanged (p = 0.813). Total PEEP and auto-PEEP were not affected (P > 0.999). PaCO₂ reduction was greater in patients with higher respiratory system elastance.
conclusionsIn sedated, mechanically ventilated patients with COPD, a strategy using high inspiratory flow with a short inspiratory pause reduces PaCO₂ and improves oxygenation without increasing auto-PEEP.
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.