Trial reportCritical care science2026
Comparison of PEEP titration methods to improve respiratory system compliance in acute respiratory distress syndrome: a randomized controlled study.
Trial report in Critical care science, 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.
- Clinical Application of Electrical Impedance Tomography in Emergency and Critical Care Medicine.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the effects of four positive end-expiratory pressure titration methods on respiratory system compliance over the first 3 days of mechanical ventilation and to analyze the agreement between derived positive end-expiratory pressure and compliance values among these methods immediately after randomization.
methodsSingle-center, randomized study acute respiratory distress syndrome patients were assigned to one of four groups based on positive end-expiratory pressure titration methods: electrical impedance tomography, transpulmonary pressure measured via an esophageal catheter, the best compliance approach with daily positive end-expiratory pressure titration, and a control group using a low positive end-expiratory pressure/ fraction of inspired oxygen table with adjustments as necessary. The primary outcome was mean respiratory system compliance over the first 3 days of mechanical ventilation. Immediately post-randomization, the best positive end-expiratory pressure according to each method was assessed for every patient, and within-patient agreement of titrated positive end-expiratory pressure and compliance for pairs of methods was calculated with the Bland-Altman method.
resultsForty-nine patients participated. Compared to control, the mean difference in compliance was 0.03mL/cmH2O (95%CI -2.74 to 2.8) in the Electrical impedance tomography Group; 1.90mL/cmH2O (95%CI -0.98 to 4.78) in the Catheter Group, and 1.42mL/cmH2O (95%CI -1.35 to 4.19) in the best compliance group. Within-patient agreement of titrated positive end-expiratory pressure and compliance was poor, with 95% limits of agreement ranging from -9.3 to 9cmH2O for positive end-expiratory pressure and from -8.5 to 11.4mL/cmH2O for compliance.
conclusionNo significant differences in mean respiratory system compliance were found among positive end-expiratory pressure titration methods compared to control. The agreement between titrated positive end-expiratory pressure and respiratory system compliance using different methods was low.
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.