PEEP titration during prone positioning for acute respiratory distress syndrome
No major trial evaluating prone positioning for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) has incorporated a high-positive end-expiratory pressure (high-PEEP) strategy despite complementary physiological rationales. We evaluated generalizability of three recent proning trials to patients receiving...
| Autores: | , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2015 |
| País: | España |
| Institución: | Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona |
| Repositorio: | Dipòsit Digital de Documents de la UAB |
| Idioma: | inglés |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:ddd.uab.cat:296548 |
| Acceso en línea: | https://ddd.uab.cat/record/296548 https://dx.doi.org/urn:doi:10.1186/s13054-015-1153-9 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | Humans Positive-Pressure Respiration Prone Position Respiratory Distress Syndrome, Adult |
| Sumario: | No major trial evaluating prone positioning for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) has incorporated a high-positive end-expiratory pressure (high-PEEP) strategy despite complementary physiological rationales. We evaluated generalizability of three recent proning trials to patients receiving a high-PEEP strategy. All trials employed a relatively low-PEEP strategy. After protocol ventilator settings were initiated and the patient was positioned per treatment assignment, post-intervention PEEP was not more than 5 cm HO in 16.7 % and not more than 10 cm HO in 66.0 % of patients. Post-intervention PEEP would have been nearly twice the set PEEP had a high-PEEP strategy been employed. Use of either proning or high-PEEP likely improves survival in moderate-severe ARDS; the role for both concomitantly remains unknown. |
|---|