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
. 2025 Dec;57(1):2543978.
doi: 10.1080/07853890.2025.2543978. Epub 2025 Aug 8.

Effect of driving pressure-guided positive end-expiratory pressure on respiratory mechanics and clinical outcomes in surgical patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Yu-Han Sun  1   2   3 , Xing-Long Yang  1   2 , Bin-Bin Dong  1   2 , Qi Liu  1   2
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Effect of driving pressure-guided positive end-expiratory pressure on respiratory mechanics and clinical outcomes in surgical patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Yu-Han Sun et al. Ann Med. 2025 Dec.

Abstract

Background: Intraoperative driving pressure-guided positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEPdp) is effective for reducing postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs). However, its impact on respiratory mechanics and clinical outcomes requires further elaboration.

Methods: PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science and Embase were searched from inception to May 2024 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the effect of PEEPdp with conventional fixed positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) in patients undergoing surgery. The primary outcomes were the effects on the driving pressure (DP), static respiratory compliance and plateau pressure (Pplat). Secondary outcomes included the effects on common clinical outcomes and the incidence of PPCs. Risk ratios or mean differences were pooled using fixed- or random-effects models.

Results: Nineteen RCTs involving 3744 patients were included. The mean of PEEPdp was 8.2 cmH2O with 95% CI from 7 cmH2O to 9.5 cmH2O, while the median of PEEP in the conventional group was 5 cmH2O with an interquartile range of 1 cmH2O. Patients in the PEEPdp group were ventilated with lower DP (mean: 10 cmH2O, 95% CI [8.8, 11.1] vs. mean: 11.9 cmH2O, 95% CI [10.6, 13.3]; p < .00001), and increased respiratory compliance (mean: 46.4 ml/cmH2O, 95% CI [42.1, 50.7] vs. mean: 39 ml/cmH2O, 95% CI [35.2, 42.8]; p < .0001) with nonsignificant Pplat. PEEPdp did not significantly affect intensive care unit (ICU) admission, mortality or length of hospital and ICU stay (p > .05), but it reduced the incidence of PPCs (p = .001). The benefits were especially evident in patients undergoing abdominal surgery, those with DP less than 10 cmH2O or those with PEEPdp ranging from 5 to 10 cmH2O or when PEEPdp was titrated via a stepwise increase method (p < .05).

Conclusions: PEEPdp allows for ventilation with lower DP, improved static respiratory compliance and fewer PPCs. No significant effects were observed on broader clinical outcomes per current data.

Keywords: Respiratory mechanics; driving pressure; intraoperative lung protective ventilation; lung injury; positive end-expiratory pressure.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Flowchart of selection process in this systematic review. PPCs: postoperative pulmonary complications; ICU: intensive care unit.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Effect of PEEPdp on respiratory mechanics. PEEP: positive end expiratory pressure; DP: driving pressure.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
Effect of PEEPdp on clinical outcomes. PEEP: positive end expiratory pressure; DP: driving pressure; ICU: intensive care unit.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Meara JG, Leather AJM, Hagander L, et al. Global Surgery 2030: evidence and solutions for achieving health, welfare, and economic development. Lancet. 2015;386(9993):569–624. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)60160-X. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Weiser TG, Regenbogen SE, Thompson KD, et al. An estimation of the global volume of surgery: a modelling strategy based on available data. Lancet. 2008;372(9633):139–144. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(08)60878-8. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Nepogodiev D, Martin J, Biccard B, et al. Global burden of postoperative death. Lancet. 2019;393(10170):401. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)33139-8. - DOI - PubMed
    1. GBD 2021 Causes of Death Collaborators . Global burden of 288 causes of death and life expectancy decomposition in 204 countries and territories and 811 subnational locations, 1990–2021: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2021. Lancet. 2024;403:2100–2132. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Fernandez-Bustamante A, Frendl G, Sprung J, et al. Postoperative pulmonary complications, early mortality, and hospital stay following noncardiothoracic surgery: a multicenter study by the perioperative research network investigators. JAMA Surg. 2017;152(2):157–166. doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2016.4065. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

MeSH terms