Effect of Titrating Positive End-Expiratory Pressure (PEEP) With an Esophageal Pressure-Guided Strategy vs an Empirical High PEEP-Fio2 Strategy on Death and Days Free From Mechanical Ventilation Among Patients With Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: A Randomized Clinical Trial
- PMID: 30776290
- PMCID: PMC6439595
- DOI: 10.1001/jama.2019.0555
Effect of Titrating Positive End-Expiratory Pressure (PEEP) With an Esophageal Pressure-Guided Strategy vs an Empirical High PEEP-Fio2 Strategy on Death and Days Free From Mechanical Ventilation Among Patients With Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: A Randomized Clinical Trial
Abstract
Importance: Adjusting positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) to offset pleural pressure might attenuate lung injury and improve patient outcomes in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS).
Objective: To determine whether PEEP titration guided by esophageal pressure (PES), an estimate of pleural pressure, was more effective than empirical high PEEP-fraction of inspired oxygen (Fio2) in moderate to severe ARDS.
Design, setting, and participants: Phase 2 randomized clinical trial conducted at 14 hospitals in North America. Two hundred mechanically ventilated patients aged 16 years and older with moderate to severe ARDS (Pao2:Fio2 ≤200 mm Hg) were enrolled between October 31, 2012, and September 14, 2017; long-term follow-up was completed July 30, 2018.
Interventions: Participants were randomized to PES-guided PEEP (n = 102) or empirical high PEEP-Fio2 (n = 98). All participants received low tidal volumes.
Main outcomes and measures: The primary outcome was a ranked composite score incorporating death and days free from mechanical ventilation among survivors through day 28. Prespecified secondary outcomes included 28-day mortality, days free from mechanical ventilation among survivors, and need for rescue therapy.
Results: Two hundred patients were enrolled (mean [SD] age, 56 [16] years; 46% female) and completed 28-day follow-up. The primary composite end point was not significantly different between treatment groups (probability of more favorable outcome with PES-guided PEEP: 49.6% [95% CI, 41.7% to 57.5%]; P = .92). At 28 days, 33 of 102 patients (32.4%) assigned to PES-guided PEEP and 30 of 98 patients (30.6%) assigned to empirical PEEP-Fio2 died (risk difference, 1.7% [95% CI, -11.1% to 14.6%]; P = .88). Days free from mechanical ventilation among survivors was not significantly different (median [interquartile range]: 22 [15-24] vs 21 [16.5-24] days; median difference, 0 [95% CI, -1 to 2] days; P = .85). Patients assigned to PES-guided PEEP were significantly less likely to receive rescue therapy (4/102 [3.9%] vs 12/98 [12.2%]; risk difference, -8.3% [95% CI, -15.8% to -0.8%]; P = .04). None of the 7 other prespecified secondary clinical end points were significantly different. Adverse events included gross barotrauma, which occurred in 6 patients with PES-guided PEEP and 5 patients with empirical PEEP-Fio2.
Conclusions and relevance: Among patients with moderate to severe ARDS, PES-guided PEEP, compared with empirical high PEEP-Fio2, resulted in no significant difference in death and days free from mechanical ventilation. These findings do not support PES-guided PEEP titration in ARDS.
Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT01681225.
Conflict of interest statement
Figures
Comment in
-
The Elusive Search for "Best PEEP" and Whether Esophageal Pressure Monitoring Helps.JAMA. 2019 Mar 5;321(9):839-841. doi: 10.1001/jama.2019.0267. JAMA. 2019. PMID: 30776293 No abstract available.
-
Strategies to Adjust Positive End-Expiratory Pressure in Patients With ARDS.JAMA. 2019 Aug 13;322(6):581. doi: 10.1001/jama.2019.7876. JAMA. 2019. PMID: 31408129 No abstract available.
-
Strategies to Adjust Positive End-Expiratory Pressure in Patients With ARDS.JAMA. 2019 Aug 13;322(6):580-582. doi: 10.1001/jama.2019.7880. JAMA. 2019. PMID: 31408130 No abstract available.
-
Strategies to Adjust Positive End-Expiratory Pressure in Patients With ARDS.JAMA. 2019 Aug 13;322(6):581. doi: 10.1001/jama.2019.7884. JAMA. 2019. PMID: 31408131 No abstract available.
-
PEEP titration guided by transpulmonary pressure: lessons from a negative trial.J Thorac Dis. 2019 Sep;11(Suppl 15):S1957-S1962. doi: 10.21037/jtd.2019.08.03. J Thorac Dis. 2019. PMID: 31632797 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
-
Positive-end expiratory pressure titration and transpulmonary pressure: the EPVENT 2 trial.J Thorac Dis. 2019 Sep;11(Suppl 15):S2012-S2017. doi: 10.21037/jtd.2019.06.34. J Thorac Dis. 2019. PMID: 31632813 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
-
Revisiting Old Friends: Adjunctive Therapies in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome.Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2021 Aug 15;204(4):473-475. doi: 10.1164/rccm.202009-3722RR. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2021. PMID: 34192505 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
Similar articles
-
Effect of Esophageal Pressure-guided Positive End-Expiratory Pressure on Survival from Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: A Risk-based and Mechanistic Reanalysis of the EPVent-2 Trial.Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2021 Nov 15;204(10):1153-1163. doi: 10.1164/rccm.202009-3539OC. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2021. PMID: 34464237 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
A clinical study on mechanical ventilation PEEP setting for traumatic ARDS patients guided by esophageal pressure.Technol Health Care. 2019;27(1):37-47. doi: 10.3233/THC-181380. Technol Health Care. 2019. PMID: 30475777
-
Compliance-guided versus FiO2-driven positive-end expiratory pressure in patients with moderate or severe acute respiratory distress syndrome according to the Berlin definition.Med Intensiva. 2017 Jun-Jul;41(5):277-284. doi: 10.1016/j.medin.2016.08.009. Epub 2016 Oct 21. Med Intensiva. 2017. PMID: 27776936 English, Spanish.
-
High versus low positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) levels for mechanically ventilated adult patients with acute lung injury and acute respiratory distress syndrome.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Jun 6;2013(6):CD009098. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009098.pub2. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013. Update in: Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021 Mar 30;3:CD009098. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009098.pub3 PMID: 23740697 Free PMC article. Updated. Review.
-
Mechanical ventilation strategies for intensive care unit patients without acute lung injury or acute respiratory distress syndrome: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Crit Care. 2016 Jul 22;20(1):226. doi: 10.1186/s13054-016-1396-0. Crit Care. 2016. PMID: 27448995 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
Methods for determining optimal positive end-expiratory pressure in patients undergoing invasive mechanical ventilation: a scoping review.Can J Anaesth. 2024 Nov;71(11):1535-1555. doi: 10.1007/s12630-024-02871-6. Epub 2024 Nov 20. Can J Anaesth. 2024. PMID: 39565498 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Esophageal pressure as estimation of pleural pressure: a study in a model of eviscerated chest.BMC Anesthesiol. 2024 Nov 14;24(1):415. doi: 10.1186/s12871-024-02806-0. BMC Anesthesiol. 2024. PMID: 39543495 Free PMC article.
-
Precision Medicine in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: Progress, Challenges, and the Road ahead.Clin Chest Med. 2024 Dec;45(4):835-848. doi: 10.1016/j.ccm.2024.08.005. Epub 2024 Sep 20. Clin Chest Med. 2024. PMID: 39443001 Review.
-
A bibliometric analysis of respiratory mechanics research related to acute respiratory distress syndrome from 1985 to 2023.Front Med (Lausanne). 2024 Sep 20;11:1420875. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2024.1420875. eCollection 2024. Front Med (Lausanne). 2024. PMID: 39371338 Free PMC article.
-
Impact of the transpulmonary pressure on right ventricle impairment incidence during acute respiratory distress syndrome: a pilot study in adults and children.Intensive Care Med Exp. 2024 Sep 27;12(1):84. doi: 10.1186/s40635-024-00671-2. Intensive Care Med Exp. 2024. PMID: 39331249 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Brower RG, Matthay MA, Morris A, Schoenfeld D, Thompson BT, Wheeler A; Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Network . Ventilation with lower tidal volumes as compared with traditional tidal volumes for acute lung injury and the acute respiratory distress syndrome. N Engl J Med. 2000;342(18):1301-1308. doi:10.1056/NEJM200005043421801 - DOI - PubMed
-
- Loring SH, O’Donnell CR, Behazin N, et al. . Esophageal pressures in acute lung injury: do they represent artifact or useful information about transpulmonary pressure, chest wall mechanics, and lung stress? J Appl Physiol (1985). 2010;108(3):515-522. doi:10.1152/japplphysiol.00835.2009 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Associated data
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
