Respiratory failure & ventilation
Heterogeneous impact of Sighs on mortality in patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure: insights from the PROTECTION study
Authors' conclusion
Addition of Sigh to PSV could reduce mortality in AHRF non-responder to Sigh and exposed to Low-PEEP.
Study context
- Population
- Patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF) during assisted mechanical ventilation enrolled in the PROTECTION trial
- Comparison
- Pressure support ventilation (PSV) with Sigh vs PSV with no sigh
- Primary endpoint
- Mortality in predefined subgroups (sigh responders vs non-responders; High vs Low PEEP)
- Follow-up
- 28 days
Methodological detailsmulticentre, predefined subgroups
- Multicentre
- Predefined subgroups
Primary result
As reported in the abstract
28-day mortality by subgroup
Non-responders (56 randomised to Sigh, 55%): 28-day mortality Sigh vs No Sigh
17%vs.36%
log-rank p = 0.031
Low-PEEP (54 randomised to Sigh, 48%): 28-day mortality Sigh vs No Sigh
13%vs.31%
log-rank p = 0.021
Further findings
Tidal volume, respiratory rate and ventilatory ratio · 7 days
- Decreased with Sigh vs No Sigh
Ventilatory ratio (non-responders and Low-PEEP)
- Associated with mortality and successful extubation
Original publication
Heterogeneous impact of Sighs on mortality in patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure: insights from the PROTECTION study. Ann Intensive Care. Published 5 October 2024. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →