Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2013 Jun 6;2013(6):CD009098.
doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009098.pub2.

High versus low positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) levels for mechanically ventilated adult patients with acute lung injury and acute respiratory distress syndrome

Roberto Santa Cruz  1 , Juan Ignacio Rojas, Rolando Nervi, Roberto Heredia, Agustín Ciapponi
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

High versus low positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) levels for mechanically ventilated adult patients with acute lung injury and acute respiratory distress syndrome

Roberto Santa Cruz et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. .

Update in

Abstract

Background: Mortality in patients with acute lung injury (ALI) and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) remains high. These patients require mechanical ventilation, but this modality has been associated with ventilator-induced lung injury. High levels of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) could reduce this condition and improve patient survival.

Objectives: To assess the benefits and harms of high versus low levels of PEEP in patients with ALI and ARDS.

Search methods: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library, 2013, Issue 4), MEDLINE (1950 to May 2013), EMBASE (1982 to May 2013), LILACS (1982 to May 2013) and SCI (Science Citation Index). We used the Science Citation Index to find references that have cited the identified trials. We did not specifically conduct manual searches of abstracts of conference proceedings for this review. We also searched for ongoing trials (www.trialscentral.org; www.clinicaltrial.gov and www.controlled-trials.com).

Selection criteria: We included randomized controlled trials that compared the effects of two levels of PEEP in ALI and ARDS participants who were intubated and mechanically ventilated in intensive care for at least 24 hours.

Data collection and analysis: Two review authors assessed the trial quality and extracted data independently. We contacted investigators to identify additional published and unpublished studies.

Main results: We included seven studies that compared high versus low levels of PEEP (2565 participants). In five of the studies (2417 participants), a comparison was made between high and low levels of PEEP with the same tidal volume in both groups, but in the remaining two studies (148 participants), the tidal volume was different between high- and low-level groups. We saw evidence of risk of bias in three studies, and the remaining studies fulfilled all criteria for adequate trial quality.In the main analysis, we assessed mortality occurring before hospital discharge only in those studies that compared high versus low PEEP with the same tidal volume in both groups. With the three studies that were included, the meta-analysis revealed no statistically significant differences between the two groups (relative risk (RR) 0.90, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.81 to 1.01), nor was any statistically significant difference seen in the risk of barotrauma (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.42). Oxygenation was improved in the high-PEEP group, although data derived from the studies showed a considerable degree of statistical heterogeneity. The number of ventilator-free days showed no significant difference between the two groups. Available data were insufficient to allow pooling of length of stay in the intensive care unit (ICU). The subgroup of participants with ARDS showed decreased mortality in the ICU, although it must be noted that in two of the three included studies, the authors used a protective ventilatory strategy involving a low tidal volume and high levels of PEEP.

Authors' conclusions: Available evidence indicates that high levels of PEEP, as compared with low levels, did not reduce mortality before hospital discharge. The data also show that high levels of PEEP produced no significant difference in the risk of barotrauma, but rather improved participants' oxygenation to the first, third, and seventh days. This review indicates that the included studies were characterized by clinical heterogeneity.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

None known.

Figures

1
1
Flow diagram of the selection of trials included in the meta‐analysis.
2
2
Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.
3
3
Risk of bias graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies.
4
4
Forest plot of comparison: 1 High versus low levels of PEEP, outcome: 1.1 Mortality before hospital discharge.
1.1
1.1. Analysis
Comparison 1 High versus low levels of PEEP, Outcome 1 Mortality before hospital discharge.
1.2
1.2. Analysis
Comparison 1 High versus low levels of PEEP, Outcome 2 Oxygen efficiency (PaO2/FIO2). Day 1.
1.3
1.3. Analysis
Comparison 1 High versus low levels of PEEP, Outcome 3 Oxygen efficiency (PaO2/FIO2). Day 3.
1.4
1.4. Analysis
Comparison 1 High versus low levels of PEEP, Outcome 4 Oxygen efficiency (PaO2/FIO2). Day 7.
1.5
1.5. Analysis
Comparison 1 High versus low levels of PEEP, Outcome 5 Oxygen efficiency (PaO2/FIO2); Day 1. Patients with ARDS.
1.6
1.6. Analysis
Comparison 1 High versus low levels of PEEP, Outcome 6 Oxygen efficiency (PaO2/FIO2); Day 3. Patients with ARDS.
1.7
1.7. Analysis
Comparison 1 High versus low levels of PEEP, Outcome 7 Barotrauma.
1.9
1.9. Analysis
Comparison 1 High versus low levels of PEEP, Outcome 9 Ventilator‐free days (only means).
1.11
1.11. Analysis
Comparison 1 High versus low levels of PEEP, Outcome 11 Mortality before hospital discharge (studies with or without other interventions).
1.12
1.12. Analysis
Comparison 1 High versus low levels of PEEP, Outcome 12 Mortality within 28 days of randomization.
1.13
1.13. Analysis
Comparison 1 High versus low levels of PEEP, Outcome 13 Mortality before hospital discharge: older participants.
1.14
1.14. Analysis
Comparison 1 High versus low levels of PEEP, Outcome 14 Mortality before hospital discharge. PEEP according to the mechanical characteristics of the lung.
1.15
1.15. Analysis
Comparison 1 High versus low levels of PEEP, Outcome 15 Mortality before hospital discharge. PEEP according to FIO2 and PaO2.
1.16
1.16. Analysis
Comparison 1 High versus low levels of PEEP, Outcome 16 Mortality before hospital discharge. High PEEP and low tidal volume versus low PEEP and high tidal volume.
1.17
1.17. Analysis
Comparison 1 High versus low levels of PEEP, Outcome 17 Mortality in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU). Patients with ARDS.
1.18
1.18. Analysis
Comparison 1 High versus low levels of PEEP, Outcome 18 Mortality before hospital discharge. Sensitivity analysis. Studies of good quality.
1.19
1.19. Analysis
Comparison 1 High versus low levels of PEEP, Outcome 19 Mortality before hospital discharge.Sensitivity analysis. Exclusion of the study with large effect size.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

References to studies included in this review

Amato 1998 {published data only}
    1. Amato MB, Barbas CS, Medeiros DM, Magaldi RB, Schettino GP, Lorenzi‐Filho G, et al. Effects of a protective‐ventilation strategy on mortality in the acute respiratory distress syndrome. New England Journal of Medicine 1998;338:347‐54. [PUBMED: 9449727] - PubMed
Brower 2004 {published data only}
    1. Brower RG, Lanken PN, MacIntyre N, Matthay MA, Morris A, Ancukiewicz M, et al. Higher versus lower positive end‐expiratory pressures in patients with the acute respiratory distress syndrome. New England Journal of Medicine 2004;351:327‐36. [PUBMED: 15269312] - PubMed
Huh 2009 {published data only}
    1. Huh JW, Jung H, Choi HS, Hong SB, Lim CM, Koh Y. Efficacy of positive end‐expiratory pressure titration after the alveolar recruitment manoeuvre in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome. Critical Care 2009;13:R22. [PUBMED: 19239703] - PMC - PubMed
Meade 2008 {published data only}
    1. Meade MO, Cook DJ, Guyatt GH, Slutsky AS, Arabi YM, Cooper DJ, et al. Ventilation strategy using low tidal volumes, recruitment maneuvers, and high positive end‐expiratory pressure for acute lung injury and acute respiratory distress syndrome: A randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2008;299:637‐45. [PUBMED: 18270352] - PubMed
Mercat 2008 {published data only}
    1. Mercat A, Richard JC, Vielle B, Jaber S, Osman D, Diehl JL, et al. Positive end‐expiratory pressure setting in adults with acute lung injury and acute respiratory distress syndrome: A randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2008;299:646‐55. [PUBMED: 18270353] - PubMed
Talmor 2008 {published data only}
    1. Talmor D, Sarge T, Malhotra A, O´Donnell CR, Ritz R, Lisbon A, et al. Mechanical ventilation guided by esophageal pressure in acute lung injury. New England Journal of Medicine 2008;359:2095‐104. [PUBMED: 19001507] - PMC - PubMed
Villar 2006 {published data only}
    1. Villar J, Kacmarek RM, Perez‐Mendez L, Aguirre‐Jaime A. A high positive end‐expiratory pressure, low tidal volume ventilatory strategy improves outcome in persistent acute distress syndrome: A randomized, controlled trial. Critical Care Medicine 2006;34:1311‐18. [PUBMED: 16557151] - PubMed

References to studies excluded from this review

Amato 1995 {published data only}
    1. Amato MB, Barbas CS, Medeiros DM, Schettino GP, Lorenzi‐Filho G, Kairalla RA, et al. Beneficial effects of the "open lung approach" with low distending pressures in acute respiratory distress syndrome: A prospective randomized study on mechanical ventilation. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine 1995;152:1835‐46. [PUBMED: 8520744] - PubMed
Badet 2009 {published data only}
    1. Badet M, Bayle F, Richard JC, Guerin C. Comparison of optimal positive end‐expiratory pressure and recruitment maneuvers during lung‐protective mechanical ventilation in patients with acute lung injury/acute respiratory distress syndrome. Respiratory Care 2009;54:847‐54. [PUBMED: 19558735] - PubMed
Burns 2001 {published data only}
    1. Burns D, West TA, Hawkins K, O'Keefe G. Immediate effects of positive end‐expiratory pressure and low and high tidal volume ventilation upon gas exchange and compliance in patients with acute lung injury. The Journal of Trauma 2001;51:1177‐81. [PUBMED: 11747202] - PubMed
Carvalho 1997 {published data only}
    1. Carvalho CR, Barbas CS, Medeiros DM, Magaldi RB, Lorenzi Filho G, Kairalla RA, et al. Temporal hemodynamic effects of permissive hypercapnia associated with ideal PEEP in ARDS. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine 1997;156:1458‐66. [PUBMED: 9372661] - PubMed
Dellamonica 2011 {published data only}
    1. Dellamonica J, Lerolle N, Sargentini C, Beduneau G, Marco F, Mercat A, et al. PEEP‐induced changes in lung volume in acute respiratory distress syndrome. Two methods to estimate alveolar recruitment. Intensive Care Medicine 2011;37:1595‐604. [PUBMED: 21866369] - PubMed
Grasso 2005 {published data only}
    1. Grasso S, Fanelli V, Cafarelli A, Anaclerio R, Amabile M, Ancona G, et al. Effects of high versus low positive end‐expiratory pressures in acute respiratory distress syndrome. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine 2005;171:1002‐8. [PUBMED: 15665322] - PubMed
Grasso 2007 {published data only}
    1. Grasso S, Stripoli T, Michele M, Bruno F, Moschetta M, Angelelli G, et al. ARDSnet ventilatory protocol and alveolar hyperinflation. Role of positive end‐expiratory pressure. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine 2007;176:761‐7. [PUBMED: 17656676] - PubMed
Kallet 2007 {published data only}
    1. Kallet RH, Branson RD. Do the NIH ARDS clinical trials network PEEP/FIO2 tables provide the best evidence‐based guidance to balancing PEEP and FIO2 settings in adults?. Respiratory Care 2007;52:461‐75. [PUBMED: 17417980] - PubMed
Oczenski 2004 {published data only}
    1. Oczenski W, Hormann C, Keller C, Lorenzi N, Kepka A, Schwarz S, et al. Recruitment maneuvers after a positive end‐expiratory pressure trial do not induce sustained effects in early adult respiratory distress syndrome. Anesthesiology 2004;101:620‐5. [PUBMED: 15329586 ] - PubMed
Ranieri 1999 {published data only}
    1. Ranieri VM, Suter PM, Tortorella C, Tullio R, Dayer JM, Brienza A, et al. Effect of mechanical ventilation on inflammatory mediators in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome. JAMA 1999;282:54‐61. [PUBMED: 10404912] - PubMed
Richard 2003 {published data only}
    1. Richard JC, Brochard L, Vandelet P, Breton L, Maggiore SM, Jonson B, et al. Respective effects of end‐expiratory and end‐inspiratory pressures on alveolar recruitment in acute lung injury. Critical Care Medicine 2003;31:89‐92. [PUBMED: 12544999] - PubMed
Toth 2007 {published data only}
    1. Toth I, Leiner T, Mikor A, Szakmany T, Bogar L, Molnar Z. Hemodynamic and respiratory changes during lung recruitment and descending optimal positive end‐expiratory pressure titration in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome. Critical Care Medicine 2007;35:787‐93. [PUBMED: 17255855] - PubMed

References to ongoing studies

Kacmarek 2007 {published data only}
    1. ARDSnet Protocol vs Open Lung Approach in ARDS. Ongoing study February 1, 2007..
Pintado 2003 {published data only}
    1. Pilot study of positive end‐expiratory pressure in acute respiratory distress syndrome (PEEP‐HUPA).. Ongoing study January 2003..

Additional references

ARDSnet 2000
    1. 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. New England Journal of Medicine 2000;342:1301‐8. [PUBMED: 10793162] - PubMed
Bernard 1994
    1. Bernard GR, Artigas A, Brigham KL, Carlet J, Falke K, Hudson L, et al. The American‐European Consensus Conference on ARDS. Definitions, mechanism, relevant outcomes, and clinical trial coordination. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine 1994;149:818‐24. [PUBMED: 7509706] - PubMed
Borges 2006
    1. Borges JB, Okamoto VN, Matos GFJ, Caramez MPR, Arantes PR, Barrios F, et al. Reversibility of lung collapse and hypoxemia in early acute respiratory distress syndrome. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine 2006;174:268‐78. [PUBMED: 16690982] - PubMed
Briel 2010
    1. Briel M, Meade M, Mercat A, Brower RG, Talmor D, Walter SD, et al. Higher vs lower positive end‐expiratory pressures in patients with acute lung injury and acute respiratory distress syndrome. JAMA 2010;303:865‐73. [PUBMED: 20197533] - PubMed
Caironi 2010
    1. Caironi P, Cressoni M, Chiumello D, Ranieri M, Quintel M, Russo S, et al. Lung opening and closing during ventilation of acute respiratory distress syndrome. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine 2010;181:578‐86. [PUBMED: 19910610] - PubMed
Coffey 1983
    1. Coffey RL, Albert RK, Robertson HT. Mechanisms of physiological dead space response to PEEP after acute oleic acid lung injury. Journal of Applied Physiology 1983;55:1550‐7. [PUBMED: 6358162] - PubMed
Dasenbrook 2011
    1. Dasenbrook EC, Needham DM, Brower RG, Fan E. Higher PEEP in patients with acute lung injury: A systematic review and meta‐analysis. Respiratory Care 2011;56:568‐75. [PUBMED: 21276322] - PubMed
Dorinsky 1983
    1. Dorinsky PM, Whitcomb ME. The effect of PEEP on cardiac output. Chest 1983;84:210‐6. [PUBMED: 6347545] - PubMed
Eisner 2002
    1. Eisner MD, Thompson BT, Schoenfeld D, Anzueto A, Matthay MA. Airway pressures and early barotrauma in patients with acute lung injury and acute respiratory distress syndrome. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine 2002;165:978‐82. [PUBMED: 11934725] - PubMed
Gattinoni 1993
    1. Gattinoni L, D'andrea L, Pelosi P, Vitale G, Pesenti A, Fumagalli R. Regional effects and mechanism of positive end‐expiratory pressure in early adult respiratory distress syndrome. JAMA 1993;16:2122‐7. [PUBMED: 8468768] - PubMed
Gattinoni 2006
    1. Gattinoni L, Caironi P, Cressoni M, Chiumello D, Ranieri VM, Quintel M, et al. Lung recruitment in patients with the acute respiratory distress syndrome. New England Journal of Medicine 2006;354:1775‐86. [PUBMED: 16641394] - PubMed
Gordo‐Vidal 2007
    1. Gordo‐Vidal F, Gómez‐Tello V, Palencia‐Herrejón E, Latour‐Pérez J, Sánchez‐Artola B, Díaz‐Arlesi R. High PEEP vs conventional PEEP in the acute respiratory distress syndrome: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Medicina Intensiva 2007;9:491‐501. [PUBMED: 18039449] - PubMed
Grasso 2002
    1. Grasso S, Mascia L, Turco M, Malacarne P, Giunta F, Brochard L, et al. Effects of recruiting maneuvers in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome ventilated with protective ventilatory strategy. Anesthesiology 2002;96:795‐802. [PUBMED: 11964585] - PubMed
Guyatt 2008
    1. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R, Vist GE, Falck‐Ytter Y, Schunemann HJ. What is "quality of evidence" and why is it important to clinicians. British Medical Journal 2008;336:995‐8. [PUBMED: 18456631] - PMC - PubMed
Hess 2011
    1. Hess DR. How much PEEP? Do we need another meta‐analysis?. Respiratory Care 2011;56:710‐3. [PUBMED: 21669106] - PubMed
Higgins 2003
    1. Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG. Measuring inconsistency in meta‐analyses. British Medical Journal 2003;327:557‐60. [PUBMED: 12958120] - PMC - PubMed
Higgins 2011
    1. Higgins JPT, Green S (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. www.cochrane‐handbook.org.
Hodgson 2009
    1. Hodgson C, Keating JL, Holland AE, Davies AR, Smirneos L, Bradley SJ, et al. Recruitment manoeuvres for adults with acute lung injury receiving mechanical ventilation. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2009, Issue 2. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006667.pub2] - DOI - PubMed
Imberger 2010
    1. Imberger G, McIlroy D, Pace N, Wetterslev J, Brok J, Møller A. Positive end‐expiratory pressure (PEEP) during anaesthesia for the prevention of mortality and postoperative pulmonary complications. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2010, Issue 9. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007922] - DOI - PubMed
Jedlinska 2000
    1. Jedlinska B, Mellström A, Jönsson K, Hartmann M. Influence of positive end‐expiratory pressure ventilation on peripheral tissue perfusion evaluated by measurements of tissue gases and pH. An experimental study in pigs with oleic acid lung injury. European Surgical Research 2000;32:228‐35. [PUBMED: 11014924] - PubMed
Lachmann 2007
    1. Lachmann RA, Kaam AH, Haitsma JJ, Lachmann B. High positive end‐expiratory pressure levels promote bacterial translocation in experimental pneumonia. Intensive Care Medicine 2007;33:1800‐4. [PUBMED: 17576531] - PubMed
Liberati 2009
    1. Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gotzsche PC, Ioannidis JP, et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta‐analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: Explanation and elaboration. PLoS Medicine 2009;6(7):e1000100. [PUBMED: 19621070] - PMC - PubMed
Linko 2009
    1. Linko R, Okkonen M, Pettila V, Perttila J, Parviainen I, Ruokonen E, et al. Acute respiratory failure in intensive care units. FINNALI: A prospective cohort study. Intensive Care Medicine 2009;35:1352‐61. [PUBMED: 19526218] - PubMed
Mead 1970
    1. Mead J, Takishima T, Leith D. Stress distribution in lungs: A model of pulmonary elasticity. Journal of Applied Physiology 1970;28:596‐608. [PUBMED: 5442255] - PubMed
Moher 2009
    1. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta‐analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Medicine 2009;6(7):e1000097. [PUBMED: 19621072 ] - PMC - PubMed
Murray 1988
    1. Murray JF, Matthay MA, Luce JM, Flick MR. An expanded definition of the adult respiratory distress syndrome. American Review of Respiratory Diseases 1988;158:720‐3. [PUBMED: 3202424 ] - PubMed
Oba 2009
    1. Oba Y, Thameen DM, Zaza T. High levels of PEEP may improve survival in acute respiratory distress syndrome: A meta‐analysis. Respiratory Medicine 2009;103:1174‐81. [PUBMED: 19269800] - PubMed
Petrucci 2007
    1. Petrucci N, Iacovelli W. Lung protective ventilation strategy for the acute respiratory distress syndrome. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2007, Issue 3. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003844] - DOI - PubMed
Phoenix 2009
    1. Phoenix SI, Paravastu S, Columb M, Vincent JL, Nirmalan M. Does a higher positive end expiratory pressure decrease mortality in acute respiratory distress syndrome? A systematic review and meta‐analysis. Anesthesiology 2009;110:1098‐105. [PUBMED: 19352160] - PubMed
Putensen 2009
    1. Putensen C, Theuerkauf N, Zinserling J, Wrigge H, Pelosi P. Meta‐analysis: Ventilation strategies and outcomes of the acute respiratory distress syndrome and acute lung injury. Annals of Internal Medicine 2009;151:566‐76. [PUBMED: 19841457] - PubMed
Ranieri 1991
    1. Ranieri VM, Eissa NT, Corbeil C, Chassé M, Braidy J, Matar N, et al. Effects of positive end‐expiratory pressure on alveolar recruitment and gas exchange in patients with the adult respiratory distress syndrome. American Review of Respiratory Diseases 1991;144:544‐51. [PUBMED: 1892293] - PubMed
Ranieri 2012
    1. Ranieri MV, Rubenfeld GD, Thompson BT, Ferguson ND, Caldwell E, Fann E, et al. The ARDS Definition Task Force. Acute respiratory distress syndrome: The Berlin definition. JAMA 2012;307:2526‐33. [PUBMED: 22797452 ] - PubMed
RevMan 5.1 [Computer program]
    1. The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration. Review Manager (RevMan). Version 5.1. Copenhagen: The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011.
Rubenfeld 2005
    1. Rubenfeld G, Caldwell E, Peabody E, Weaver J, Martin D, Neff M, et al. Incidence and outcomes of acute lung injury. New England Journal of Medicine 2005;353:1685‐93. [PUBMED: 16236739] - PubMed
Schoenfeld 2002
    1. Schoenfeld DA, Bernard GR. Statistical evaluation of ventilator‐free days as an efficacy measure in clinical trials of treatments for acute respiratory distress syndrome. Critical Care Medicine 2002;30:1772‐7. [PUBMED: 12163791 ] - PubMed
Suter 1975
    1. Suter PM, Fairley B, Isenberg MD. Optimum end‐expiratory airway pressure in patients with acute pulmonary failure. New England Journal of Medicine 1975;292:284‐9. [PUBMED: 234174] - PubMed
Villar 2005
    1. Villar J. The use of positive end‐expiratory pressure in the management of the acute respiratory distress syndrome. Minerva Anestesiologica 2005;71:265‐72. [PUBMED: 15886587] - PubMed
Weg 1998
    1. Weg JG, Anzueto A, Balk RA, Wiedemann HP, Pattishall EN, Schork MA, et al. The relation of pneumothorax and other air leaks to mortality in the acute respiratory distress syndrome. New England Journal of Medicine 1998;338:341‐6. [PUBMED: 9449726] - PubMed
Yang 2011
    1. Yang J, Liu F, Zhu X. The influence of high positive end‐expiratory pressure ventilation combined with low tidal volume on prognosis of patients with acute lung injury/acute respiratory distress syndrome: A meta‐analysis.. Chinese Critical Care Medicine 2011;23:5‐9. [PUBMED: 21251358] - PubMed
Zambon 2008
    1. Zambon M, Vincent JL. Mortality rates for patients with acute lung injury/ARDS have decreased over time. Chest 2008;133:1120‐7. [PUBMED: 18263687] - PubMed

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources