Lung Ultrasound to Determine the Effect of Lower vs. Higher PEEP on Lung Aeration in Patients without ARDS—A Substudy of a Randomized Clinical Trial

Background: Ventilation with lower positive end–expiratory pressure (PEEP) may cause loss of lung aeration in critically ill invasively ventilated patients. This study investigated whether a systematic lung ultrasound (LUS) scoring system can detect such changes in lung aeration in a study comparing...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Zimatore C.
Other Authors: Mahidol University
Format: Article
Published: 2023
Subjects:
Online Access:https://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/123456789/87950
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Institution: Mahidol University
id th-mahidol.87950
record_format dspace
spelling th-mahidol.879502023-07-20T01:00:55Z Lung Ultrasound to Determine the Effect of Lower vs. Higher PEEP on Lung Aeration in Patients without ARDS—A Substudy of a Randomized Clinical Trial Zimatore C. Mahidol University Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology Background: Ventilation with lower positive end–expiratory pressure (PEEP) may cause loss of lung aeration in critically ill invasively ventilated patients. This study investigated whether a systematic lung ultrasound (LUS) scoring system can detect such changes in lung aeration in a study comparing lower versus higher PEEP in invasively ventilated patients without acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Methods: Single center substudy of a national, multicenter, randomized clinical trial comparing lower versus higher PEEP ventilation strategy. Fifty–seven patients underwent a systematic 12–region LUS examination within 12 h and between 24 to 48 h after start of invasive ventilation, according to randomization. The primary endpoint was a change in the global LUS aeration score, where a higher value indicates a greater impairment in lung aeration. Results: Thirty–three and twenty–four patients received ventilation with lower PEEP (median PEEP 1 (0–5) cm H2O) or higher PEEP (median PEEP 8 (8–8) cm H2O), respectively. Median global LUS aeration scores within 12 h and between 24 and 48 h were 8 (4 to 14) and 9 (4 to 12) (difference 1 (–2 to 3)) in the lower PEEP group, and 7 (2–11) and 6 (1–12) (difference 0 (–2 to 3)) in the higher PEEP group. Neither differences in changes over time nor differences in absolute scores reached statistical significance. Conclusions: In this substudy of a randomized clinical trial comparing lower PEEP versus higher PEEP in patients without ARDS, LUS was unable to detect changes in lung aeration. 2023-07-19T18:00:55Z 2023-07-19T18:00:55Z 2023-06-01 Article Diagnostics Vol.13 No.12 (2023) 10.3390/diagnostics13121989 20754418 2-s2.0-85164128392 https://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/123456789/87950 SCOPUS
institution Mahidol University
building Mahidol University Library
continent Asia
country Thailand
Thailand
content_provider Mahidol University Library
collection Mahidol University Institutional Repository
topic Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
spellingShingle Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
Zimatore C.
Lung Ultrasound to Determine the Effect of Lower vs. Higher PEEP on Lung Aeration in Patients without ARDS—A Substudy of a Randomized Clinical Trial
description Background: Ventilation with lower positive end–expiratory pressure (PEEP) may cause loss of lung aeration in critically ill invasively ventilated patients. This study investigated whether a systematic lung ultrasound (LUS) scoring system can detect such changes in lung aeration in a study comparing lower versus higher PEEP in invasively ventilated patients without acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Methods: Single center substudy of a national, multicenter, randomized clinical trial comparing lower versus higher PEEP ventilation strategy. Fifty–seven patients underwent a systematic 12–region LUS examination within 12 h and between 24 to 48 h after start of invasive ventilation, according to randomization. The primary endpoint was a change in the global LUS aeration score, where a higher value indicates a greater impairment in lung aeration. Results: Thirty–three and twenty–four patients received ventilation with lower PEEP (median PEEP 1 (0–5) cm H2O) or higher PEEP (median PEEP 8 (8–8) cm H2O), respectively. Median global LUS aeration scores within 12 h and between 24 and 48 h were 8 (4 to 14) and 9 (4 to 12) (difference 1 (–2 to 3)) in the lower PEEP group, and 7 (2–11) and 6 (1–12) (difference 0 (–2 to 3)) in the higher PEEP group. Neither differences in changes over time nor differences in absolute scores reached statistical significance. Conclusions: In this substudy of a randomized clinical trial comparing lower PEEP versus higher PEEP in patients without ARDS, LUS was unable to detect changes in lung aeration.
author2 Mahidol University
author_facet Mahidol University
Zimatore C.
format Article
author Zimatore C.
author_sort Zimatore C.
title Lung Ultrasound to Determine the Effect of Lower vs. Higher PEEP on Lung Aeration in Patients without ARDS—A Substudy of a Randomized Clinical Trial
title_short Lung Ultrasound to Determine the Effect of Lower vs. Higher PEEP on Lung Aeration in Patients without ARDS—A Substudy of a Randomized Clinical Trial
title_full Lung Ultrasound to Determine the Effect of Lower vs. Higher PEEP on Lung Aeration in Patients without ARDS—A Substudy of a Randomized Clinical Trial
title_fullStr Lung Ultrasound to Determine the Effect of Lower vs. Higher PEEP on Lung Aeration in Patients without ARDS—A Substudy of a Randomized Clinical Trial
title_full_unstemmed Lung Ultrasound to Determine the Effect of Lower vs. Higher PEEP on Lung Aeration in Patients without ARDS—A Substudy of a Randomized Clinical Trial
title_sort lung ultrasound to determine the effect of lower vs. higher peep on lung aeration in patients without ards—a substudy of a randomized clinical trial
publishDate 2023
url https://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/123456789/87950
_version_ 1781415163592704000