ArticleTrials2026
Evaluation of the effect of a long inspiratory ramp time during pressure-controlled ventilation with volume guarantee: study protocol for a randomized, controlled trial.
Article in Trials, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe inspiration of pressure-controlled ventilation is characterized by an initial sharp increase of flow rate. The resulting peak flow rate could induce a disproportionately high mechanical load, transferred from the ventilator to the pulmonary structures. A higher inspiratory ramp time could decrease the peak inspiratory flow rate, which might reduce the mechanical power transmitted to the lungs. This study compares pressure-controlled ventilation with volume guarantee with low and high inspiratory ramp time and the effects on the mechanical load transferred from the ventilator to the patient's lungs.
methodsThis is a randomized, controlled single-center trial, in which patients receive pressure-controlled ventilation with volume guarantee with short (clinical standard) or increased inspiratory ramp time. Mechanical power will be compared between the two types of ventilation. Further, the effects of the respective ventilation setting will be evaluated with the Horowitz index, the mean airway pressure, and changes in respiratory system compliance. The occurrence of atelectasis will be investigated utilizing electrical impedance tomography. Additionally, lung-specific proteins in patients' blood will be measured, seeking indications of mechanical stress in their dynamics and postoperative pulmonary complications will be recorded and compared between groups. DISCUSSION: This trial aims to evaluate the feasibility of decreasing inspiratory flow rate during pressure-controlled ventilation with volume guarantee by increasing inspiratory ramp time and to analyze its effects on mechanical power, oxygenation, respiratory system mechanics, atelectasis, and postoperative pulmonary complications. Furthermore, lung-specific proteins in patients' blood will be examined in regard to find a novel, helpful biomarker, representing the mechanical load of the lungs. The results of this study could provide valuable information to improve perioperative mechanical ventilation with a reduced mechanical power through a simple an ubiquitously available modification of the breathing pattern, namely increasing inspiratory ramp time. Additionally, identification of a lung-specific biomarker reflecting mechanical load of the lungs might enhance research of lung-protective ventilation.
trial registrationGerman Clinical Trials Register (DRKS), DRKS00035496. Registered on 12 November 2024; URL: https://drks.de/search/en/trial/DRKS00035496/details . Local Trials Register: Freiburger Register of Clinical Studies (FRKS), FRKS005304.
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.