Respiratory failure & ventilation
Spontaneous Versus Controlled Mechanical Ventilation in Patients With Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome—A Scoping Review
Authors' conclusion
Our scoping review identifies extensive documentation of widespread use of spontaneous breathing techniques, with both invasive and non-invasive ventilation, in patients with ARDS. Despite data from several large observational studies and one large randomised clinical trial, the benefits and harms of spontaneous versus controlled ventilation remain unclear.
Study context
- Population
- Mechanically ventilated patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), irrespective of severitystudies included
- Participants
- 564 participants
- Comparison
- Spontaneous vs controlled mechanical ventilation
- Outcome
- Scope of evidence
Methodological detailsPRISMA extension for scoping reviews, meta-analyses where relevant, Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE), Search completed May 13, 2025 (PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, Cochrane Library)
- PRISMA extension for scoping reviews
- Meta-analyses where relevant
- GRADE
- Search completed May 13, 2025 (PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, Cochrane Library)
Pooled result
As reported in the abstract
Studies identified (titles)
6827
Studies assessed in full text
1193
Clinical trials included
114
Observational studies included
267
Original publication
Spontaneous Versus Controlled Mechanical Ventilation in Patients With Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome—A Scoping Review. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. Published 4 August 2025. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →