OBJECTIVE: We tested the hypothesis that subjects randomized to the 6 mL/kg predicted body weight tidal volume study group of the National Institutes of Health Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) Network study had higher levels of intrinsic positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) than subjects randomized to the 12 mL/kg predicted body weight tidal volume study group. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of a subgroup from a randomized controlled trial. SETTING: Hospitals located in San Francisco, CA, and Seattle, WA. PATIENTS: Eighty-four patients enrolled in the ARDS Network tidal volume trial in San Francisco, CA, and Seattle, WA, with records of measurement of intrinsic PEEP. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS:Intrinsic PEEP was assessed a median of six times over the first 48 hrs of ARDS Network protocol ventilation in study subjects, with no significant difference in number of measurements between subjects randomized to the tidal volume protocol of 6 mL/kg compared with 12 mL/kg. We found that intrinsic PEEP was higher among subjects randomized to the 6 mL/kg protocol, with a median intrinsic PEEP of 1.3 cm H2O (interquartile range, 0-3.1 cm H2O), compared with a median intrinsic PEEP of 0.5 cm H2O (interquartile range, 0-1.5 cm H2O) among subjects randomized to 12 mL/kg (p = .029). There was no difference in total PEEP between the study groups. CONCLUSIONS: In a subgroup of ARDS Network subjects, intrinsic PEEP was statistically significantly higher in subjects randomized to the 6 mL/kg protocol than those in the 12 mL/kg study group. The amount of intrinsic PEEP was very low in both study groups, and difference of median intrinsic PEEP between the groups was <1 cm H2O. It is unlikely that the difference in intrinsic PEEP between the study groups was clinically important in the ARDS Network study of low tidal volume ventilation.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: We tested the hypothesis that subjects randomized to the 6 mL/kg predicted body weight tidal volume study group of the National Institutes of Health Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) Network study had higher levels of intrinsic positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) than subjects randomized to the 12 mL/kg predicted body weight tidal volume study group. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of a subgroup from a randomized controlled trial. SETTING: Hospitals located in San Francisco, CA, and Seattle, WA. PATIENTS: Eighty-four patients enrolled in the ARDS Network tidal volume trial in San Francisco, CA, and Seattle, WA, with records of measurement of intrinsic PEEP. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Intrinsic PEEP was assessed a median of six times over the first 48 hrs of ARDS Network protocol ventilation in study subjects, with no significant difference in number of measurements between subjects randomized to the tidal volume protocol of 6 mL/kg compared with 12 mL/kg. We found that intrinsic PEEP was higher among subjects randomized to the 6 mL/kg protocol, with a median intrinsic PEEP of 1.3 cm H2O (interquartile range, 0-3.1 cm H2O), compared with a median intrinsic PEEP of 0.5 cm H2O (interquartile range, 0-1.5 cm H2O) among subjects randomized to 12 mL/kg (p = .029). There was no difference in total PEEP between the study groups. CONCLUSIONS: In a subgroup of ARDS Network subjects, intrinsic PEEP was statistically significantly higher in subjects randomized to the 6 mL/kg protocol than those in the 12 mL/kg study group. The amount of intrinsic PEEP was very low in both study groups, and difference of median intrinsic PEEP between the groups was <1 cm H2O. It is unlikely that the difference in intrinsic PEEP between the study groups was clinically important in the ARDS Network study of low tidal volume ventilation.
Authors: Saul Chemonges; Kiran Shekar; John-Paul Tung; Kimble R Dunster; Sara Diab; David Platts; Ryan P Watts; Shaun D Gregory; Samuel Foley; Gabriela Simonova; Charles McDonald; Rylan Hayes; Judith Bellpart; Daniel Timms; Michelle Chew; Yoke L Fung; Michael Toon; Marc O Maybauer; John F Fraser Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2014-03-25 Impact factor: 3.411
Authors: Rashid N Nadeem; Ashraf M Elhoufi; Mohamed A Soliman; Islam Bon; Zaineb A Obaida; Mayada M Hussien; Lamiaa Salama; Ahmed N Elsousi; Sahish Kamat; Rami M Satti; Naheed Elahi; Raed H Abuhijleh; Moatz G ElZeiny; Hitham Fargaly; Mohamed M Ibrahim Journal: Cureus Date: 2019-06-06