Effect of a Lower vs Higher Positive End-Expiratory Pressure Strategy on Ventilator-Free Days in ICU Patients Without ARDS: A Randomized Clinical Trial
- PMID: 33295981
- PMCID: PMC7726701
- DOI: 10.1001/jama.2020.23517
Effect of a Lower vs Higher Positive End-Expiratory Pressure Strategy on Ventilator-Free Days in ICU Patients Without ARDS: A Randomized Clinical Trial
Abstract
Importance: It is uncertain whether invasive ventilation can use lower positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) in critically ill patients without acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS).
Objective: To determine whether a lower PEEP strategy is noninferior to a higher PEEP strategy regarding duration of mechanical ventilation at 28 days.
Design, setting, and participants: Noninferiority randomized clinical trial conducted from October 26, 2017, through December 17, 2019, in 8 intensive care units (ICUs) in the Netherlands among 980 patients without ARDS expected not to be extubated within 24 hours after start of ventilation. Final follow-up was conducted in March 2020.
Interventions: Participants were randomized to receive invasive ventilation using either lower PEEP, consisting of the lowest PEEP level between 0 and 5 cm H2O (n = 476), or higher PEEP, consisting of a PEEP level of 8 cm H2O (n = 493).
Main outcomes and measures: The primary outcome was the number of ventilator-free days at day 28, with a noninferiority margin for the difference in ventilator-free days at day 28 of -10%. Secondary outcomes included ICU and hospital lengths of stay; ICU, hospital, and 28- and 90-day mortality; development of ARDS, pneumonia, pneumothorax, severe atelectasis, severe hypoxemia, or need for rescue therapies for hypoxemia; and days with use of vasopressors or sedation.
Results: Among 980 patients who were randomized, 969 (99%) completed the trial (median age, 66 [interquartile range {IQR}, 56-74] years; 246 [36%] women). At day 28, 476 patients in the lower PEEP group had a median of 18 ventilator-free days (IQR, 0-27 days) and 493 patients in the higher PEEP group had a median of 17 ventilator-free days (IQR, 0-27 days) (mean ratio, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.95-∞; P = .007 for noninferiority), and the lower boundary of the 95% CI was within the noninferiority margin. Occurrence of severe hypoxemia was 20.6% vs 17.6% (risk ratio, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.90-1.51; P = .99) and need for rescue strategy was 19.7% vs 14.6% (risk ratio, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.02-1.79; adjusted P = .54) in patients in the lower and higher PEEP groups, respectively. Mortality at 28 days was 38.4% vs 42.0% (hazard ratio, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.73-1.09; P = .99) in patients in the lower and higher PEEP groups, respectively. There were no statistically significant differences in other secondary outcomes.
Conclusions and relevance: Among patients in the ICU without ARDS who were expected not to be extubated within 24 hours, a lower PEEP strategy was noninferior to a higher PEEP strategy with regard to the number of ventilator-free days at day 28. These findings support the use of lower PEEP in patients without ARDS.
Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03167580.
Conflict of interest statement
Figures




Comment in
-
Searching for the Optimal PEEP in Patients Without ARDS: High, Low, or in Between?JAMA. 2020 Dec 22;324(24):2490-2492. doi: 10.1001/jama.2020.23067. JAMA. 2020. PMID: 33295963 No abstract available.
-
Quantifying the Effect of Lower vs Higher Positive End-Expiratory Pressure on Ventilator-Free Survival in ICU Patients.JAMA. 2021 Apr 20;325(15):1566-1567. doi: 10.1001/jama.2021.1700. JAMA. 2021. PMID: 33877277 No abstract available.
Similar articles
-
RELAx - REstricted versus Liberal positive end-expiratory pressure in patients without ARDS: protocol for a randomized controlled trial.Trials. 2018 May 9;19(1):272. doi: 10.1186/s13063-018-2640-5. Trials. 2018. PMID: 29739430 Free PMC article.
-
Effect of a Low vs Intermediate Tidal Volume Strategy on Ventilator-Free Days in Intensive Care Unit Patients Without ARDS: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA. 2018 Nov 13;320(18):1872-1880. doi: 10.1001/jama.2018.14280. JAMA. 2018. PMID: 30357256 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
Effect of Lung Recruitment and Titrated Positive End-Expiratory Pressure (PEEP) vs Low PEEP on Mortality in Patients With Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA. 2017 Oct 10;318(14):1335-1345. doi: 10.1001/jama.2017.14171. JAMA. 2017. PMID: 28973363 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
Effect of lung recruitment and titrated positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) versus low PEEP on patients with moderate-severe acute respiratory distress syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Ther Adv Respir Dis. 2019 Jan-Dec;13:1753466619858228. doi: 10.1177/1753466619858228. Ther Adv Respir Dis. 2019. PMID: 31269867 Free PMC article.
-
Positive end-expiratory pressure for preterm infants requiring conventional mechanical ventilation for respiratory distress syndrome or bronchopulmonary dysplasia.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Feb 26;2(2):CD004500. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004500.pub3. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019. PMID: 30820939 Free PMC article.
Cited by
-
Ventilation during Lung Resection and Critical Care: Comparative Clinical Outcomes.Anesthesiology. 2022 Oct 1;137(4):473-483. doi: 10.1097/ALN.0000000000004325. Anesthesiology. 2022. PMID: 35993993 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
-
Supplementation of High Velocity Nasal Insufflation with a Nonrebreather Mask for Severe Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure in Adult Patients with COVID-19.Case Rep Crit Care. 2022 May 24;2022:5004108. doi: 10.1155/2022/5004108. eCollection 2022. Case Rep Crit Care. 2022. PMID: 35656503 Free PMC article.
-
Higher versus lower positive end-expiratory pressure in patients without acute respiratory distress syndrome: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Crit Care. 2021 Jul 15;25(1):247. doi: 10.1186/s13054-021-03669-4. Crit Care. 2021. PMID: 34266460 Free PMC article.
-
Optimal Positive End Expiratory Pressure Levels in Ventilated Patients Without Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: A Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials.Front Med (Lausanne). 2021 Sep 1;8:730018. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2021.730018. eCollection 2021. Front Med (Lausanne). 2021. PMID: 34540872 Free PMC article.
-
Personalized Positive End-Expiratory Pressure and Tidal Volume in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: Bedside Physiology-Based Approach.Crit Care Explor. 2021 Jul 13;3(7):e0486. doi: 10.1097/CCE.0000000000000486. eCollection 2021 Jul. Crit Care Explor. 2021. PMID: 34278316 Free PMC article. Review.
References
-
- Neto AS, Barbas CSV, Simonis FD, et al. ; PRoVENT and PROVE Network Investigators . Epidemiological characteristics, practice of ventilation, and clinical outcome in patients at risk of acute respiratory distress syndrome in intensive care units from 16 countries (PRoVENT): an international, multicentre, prospective study. Lancet Respir Med. 2016;4(11):882-893. doi:10.1016/S2213-2600(16)30305-8 - DOI - PubMed
-
- Serpa Neto A, Filho RR, Cherpanath T, et al. ; PROVE Network Investigators . Associations between positive end-expiratory pressure and outcome of patients without ARDS at onset of ventilation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Ann Intensive Care. 2016;6(1):109. doi:10.1186/s13613-016-0208-7 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
Associated data
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical