ArticleLung2026
Elevated Driving Pressure in Pressure-Controlled Ventilation: An Independent Risk Factor for Adverse Outcomes in Mechanically Ventilated Neonates.
Article in Lung, 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDriving pressure (DP) has recently gained attention as a meaningful variable in lung-protective ventilation, particularly in studies of adult acute respiratory distress syndrome. Its role in neonates, particularly regarding bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD), is poorly defined.
methodsThis single-center retrospective study included 145 neonates who received invasive conventional mechanical ventilation (CMV) for ≥ 72 h between January 1, 2020 and December 31, 2024. In this study, DP was obtained by subtracting the applied positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) from the peak inspiratory pressure(PIP), following common clinical practice in pressure-controlled ventilation. Patients were grouped into High DP (≥ 10 cmH
resultsThe composite adverse outcome rate was higher in the High DP group than in the Low DP group (44.7 vs. 21.7%; P = 0.03), primarily driven by increased BPD incidence (25.0 vs. 8.7%; P = 0.009). Multivariate analysis identified High DP (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 5.30; 95% CI, 2.20-12.74) and gestational age < 32 weeks (aOR = 11.11; 95% CI, 4.35-28.36) as independent risk factors. In the NRDS subgroup (n = 61), both High DP (aOR = 5.80; 95% CI, 1.61-20.90) and higher CRIB II score (aOR = 4.44; 95% CI, 1.28-15.42) independently predicted BPD, with comparable discriminatory ability (DP AUC = 0.707; CRIB II AUC = 0.733). Lower DP was protective against progression to more severe BPD (aOR = 0.20; P = 0.008).
conclusionElevated DP is an independent, modifiable risk factor for adverse outcomes-particularly BPD-in mechanically ventilated neonates. The effect is most pronounced in very preterm infants. Routine DP monitoring combined with clinical scoring (e.g., CRIB II) may improve early risk stratification and facilitate individualized lung-protective ventilation.
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.