Respiratory failure & ventilation
Effect of driving pressure-limiting strategies on outcomes of patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS): a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
Authors' conclusion
When lung protective ventilation is already applied, further limitation of driving pressure may be hard to achieve.
Study context
- Population
- Patients with ARDS
- Participants
- 431 patients · 4 trials
- Comparison
- Intervention vs Control
- Outcome
- Feasibility of intervention (post-randomization driving pressure)
Pooled result
As reported in the abstract
Post-randomization driving pressure
Mean difference
- 2.17 cmH2O
study day 1
Mean difference
- 2.09 cmH2O
study day 2
Mean difference
- 2.15 cmH2O
study day 3
Further pooled results
| Outcome | P value |
|---|---|
| Ventilator-free daysNo statistically significant difference | P = 0.88 |
Intensive care unit (ICU) LOS
- Driving pressure-limiting strategies associated with shorter ICU LOS (MD, 95% CI, p)
- - 2.40 days, - 3.31 to - 1.49, p = 0.004
Original publication
Effect of driving pressure-limiting strategies on outcomes of patients with ARDS: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Crit Care. Published 5 March 2026. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →