Cargando…
Higher versus lower positive end-expiratory pressure in patients without acute respiratory distress syndrome: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
BACKGROUND: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to assess the association of higher positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP), as opposed to lower PEEP, with hospital mortality in adult intensive care unit (ICU) patients undergoing invasive mechani...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8280384/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34266460 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13054-021-03669-4 |
_version_ | 1783722636788891648 |
---|---|
author | Pettenuzzo, Tommaso Boscolo, Annalisa De Cassai, Alessandro Sella, Nicolò Zarantonello, Francesco Persona, Paolo Pasin, Laura Landoni, Giovanni Navalesi, Paolo |
author_facet | Pettenuzzo, Tommaso Boscolo, Annalisa De Cassai, Alessandro Sella, Nicolò Zarantonello, Francesco Persona, Paolo Pasin, Laura Landoni, Giovanni Navalesi, Paolo |
author_sort | Pettenuzzo, Tommaso |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to assess the association of higher positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP), as opposed to lower PEEP, with hospital mortality in adult intensive care unit (ICU) patients undergoing invasive mechanical ventilation for reasons other than acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). METHODS: We performed an electronic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL, and Web of Science from inception until June 16, 2021 with no language restrictions. In addition, a research-in-progress database and grey literature were searched. RESULTS: We identified 22 RCTs (2225 patients) comparing higher PEEP (1007 patients) with lower PEEP (991 patients). No statistically significant association between higher PEEP and hospital mortality was observed (risk ratio 1.02, 95% confidence interval 0.89–1.16; I(2) = 0%, p = 0.62; low certainty of evidence). Among secondary outcomes, higher PEEP was associated with better oxygenation, higher respiratory system compliance, and lower risk of hypoxemia and ARDS occurrence. Furthermore, barotrauma, hypotension, duration of ventilation, lengths of stay, and ICU mortality were similar between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: In our meta-analysis of RCTs, higher PEEP, compared with lower PEEP, was not associated with mortality in patients without ARDS receiving invasive mechanical ventilation. Further large high-quality RCTs are required to confirm these findings. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13054-021-03669-4. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8280384 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-82803842021-07-16 Higher versus lower positive end-expiratory pressure in patients without acute respiratory distress syndrome: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials Pettenuzzo, Tommaso Boscolo, Annalisa De Cassai, Alessandro Sella, Nicolò Zarantonello, Francesco Persona, Paolo Pasin, Laura Landoni, Giovanni Navalesi, Paolo Crit Care Research BACKGROUND: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to assess the association of higher positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP), as opposed to lower PEEP, with hospital mortality in adult intensive care unit (ICU) patients undergoing invasive mechanical ventilation for reasons other than acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). METHODS: We performed an electronic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL, and Web of Science from inception until June 16, 2021 with no language restrictions. In addition, a research-in-progress database and grey literature were searched. RESULTS: We identified 22 RCTs (2225 patients) comparing higher PEEP (1007 patients) with lower PEEP (991 patients). No statistically significant association between higher PEEP and hospital mortality was observed (risk ratio 1.02, 95% confidence interval 0.89–1.16; I(2) = 0%, p = 0.62; low certainty of evidence). Among secondary outcomes, higher PEEP was associated with better oxygenation, higher respiratory system compliance, and lower risk of hypoxemia and ARDS occurrence. Furthermore, barotrauma, hypotension, duration of ventilation, lengths of stay, and ICU mortality were similar between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: In our meta-analysis of RCTs, higher PEEP, compared with lower PEEP, was not associated with mortality in patients without ARDS receiving invasive mechanical ventilation. Further large high-quality RCTs are required to confirm these findings. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13054-021-03669-4. BioMed Central 2021-07-15 /pmc/articles/PMC8280384/ /pubmed/34266460 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13054-021-03669-4 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Pettenuzzo, Tommaso Boscolo, Annalisa De Cassai, Alessandro Sella, Nicolò Zarantonello, Francesco Persona, Paolo Pasin, Laura Landoni, Giovanni Navalesi, Paolo Higher versus lower positive end-expiratory pressure in patients without acute respiratory distress syndrome: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials |
title | Higher versus lower positive end-expiratory pressure in patients without acute respiratory distress syndrome: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials |
title_full | Higher versus lower positive end-expiratory pressure in patients without acute respiratory distress syndrome: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials |
title_fullStr | Higher versus lower positive end-expiratory pressure in patients without acute respiratory distress syndrome: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials |
title_full_unstemmed | Higher versus lower positive end-expiratory pressure in patients without acute respiratory distress syndrome: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials |
title_short | Higher versus lower positive end-expiratory pressure in patients without acute respiratory distress syndrome: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials |
title_sort | higher versus lower positive end-expiratory pressure in patients without acute respiratory distress syndrome: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8280384/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34266460 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13054-021-03669-4 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT pettenuzzotommaso higherversuslowerpositiveendexpiratorypressureinpatientswithoutacuterespiratorydistresssyndromeametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT boscoloannalisa higherversuslowerpositiveendexpiratorypressureinpatientswithoutacuterespiratorydistresssyndromeametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT decassaialessandro higherversuslowerpositiveendexpiratorypressureinpatientswithoutacuterespiratorydistresssyndromeametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT sellanicolo higherversuslowerpositiveendexpiratorypressureinpatientswithoutacuterespiratorydistresssyndromeametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT zarantonellofrancesco higherversuslowerpositiveendexpiratorypressureinpatientswithoutacuterespiratorydistresssyndromeametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT personapaolo higherversuslowerpositiveendexpiratorypressureinpatientswithoutacuterespiratorydistresssyndromeametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT pasinlaura higherversuslowerpositiveendexpiratorypressureinpatientswithoutacuterespiratorydistresssyndromeametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT landonigiovanni higherversuslowerpositiveendexpiratorypressureinpatientswithoutacuterespiratorydistresssyndromeametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT navalesipaolo higherversuslowerpositiveendexpiratorypressureinpatientswithoutacuterespiratorydistresssyndromeametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials |