Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42659443›Full record

Trial reportCritical care science2026

Electromyographic respiratory muscle analysis in the spontaneous breathing trial: a randomized crossover trial comparing T-piece and pressure support.

Diogo Fanfa Bordin, Robledo Leal Condessa, Éder Kroeff Cardoso, Graciele Sbruzzi, Bruna Ziegler

Abstract readRandomized Controlled TrialComparative Study
In one paragraph

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. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Diogo Fanfa BordinPostraduate Program in Pulmonology, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul - Porto Alegre (RS), Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1056-5155
Robledo Leal CondessaPhysiotherapy Service, Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul - Porto Alegre (RS), Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7706-0595
Éder Kroeff CardosoPhysiotherapy Service, Hospital de Pronto Socorro de Porto Alegre - Porto Alegre (RS), Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2607-1168
Graciele SbruzziPostraduate Program in Pulmonology, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul - Porto Alegre (RS), Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4677-3098
Bruna ZieglerPostraduate Program in Pulmonology, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul - Porto Alegre (RS), Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7177-7085

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo compare the electromyographic activity of respiratory muscles during T-piece and pressure support ventilation trials.

methodsThis was a randomized crossover trial involving 16 patients weaning from mechanical ventilation. Each patient underwent two 30-minute spontaneous breathing trials (T-piece and pressure-support ventilation with 7cmH2O), separated by a 30-minute washout period, or until vital signs returned to baseline. Surface electromyography was used to assess muscle activation (percentage root mean square) and median frequency of the pectoralis major, rectus abdominis, and external intercostal muscles (nomenclature updated from diaphragm based on SENIAM and Phinyomark/De Troyer literature to account for crosstalk). Data were collected at baseline (T0), 15 (T15), and 30 minutes (T30). Intragroup comparisons were performed using two-way repeated-measures ANOVA, and intergroup differences in deltas (Δ) were analyzed using ANCOVA, adjusting for baseline values.

resultsMedian frequency remained stable for all muscles (p > 0.05), indicating no electromyographic fatigue. In contrast, percentage root mean square activation differed significantly between methods. During the T-piece spontaneous breathing trial, a progressive increase in percentage root mean square was observed in the pectoralis major, rectus abdominis, and external intercostals (p < 0.05). Under pressure support ventilation, only the pectoralis major showed a modest increase (p < 0.05), while other muscles remained stable. Intergroup comparisons of pre-to-post variation confirmed greater activation during the T-piece spontaneous breathing trial for the pectoralis major (p = 0.048) and rectus abdominis (p = 0.009). No significant differences were observed between methods for the external intercostal muscles.

conclusionsT-piece ventilation induces greater recruitment of thoracic and abdominal accessory respiratory muscles than pressure-support ventilation, reflecting a higher ventilatory demand. Stable median frequency values indicate preserved neuromuscular function and absence of clinically relevant respiratory muscle fatigue over 30 minutes. These findings suggest that pressure support ventilation partially unloads the respiratory system and may mask true ventilatory effort, whereas the T-piece more closely reproduces post-extubation conditions. Surface electromyography proved to be a feasible tool for physiological assessment during ventilatory weaning.

Indexed as

ElectromyographyPositive-Pressure RespirationRespiratory MusclesVentilator WeaningAdultCross-Over StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle Aged

Identifiers

PMID42659443
PMCPMC13518006

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.