Respiratory failure & ventilation
Technology-Enhanced Strategies to Optimize Positive End-Expiratory Pressure in Patients Receiving Invasive Mechanical Ventilation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Pooled result · Duration of mechanical ventilationResult — go to the resultMean difference −0.06 d 95% CI −0.20 to 0.09Authors' conclusion
Technology-enhanced PEEP optimization strategies did not reduce duration of mechanical ventilation, but these technologies may reduce mortality.
Study context
- Population
- Adults and children receiving invasive mechanical ventilation on an ICU (no evidence identified in children)
- Participants
- 2,951 adults · 34 studies
- Comparison
- Technology-enhanced positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) optimization vs Standard care
- Outcome
- Duration of mechanical ventilation
Methodological detailsrandom-effects models, GRADE certainty assessment, Eight studies at low risk of bias
- Random-effects models
- GRADE certainty assessment
- Eight studies at low risk of bias
Pooled result
As reported in the abstract
Mean difference
−0.06 d
95% CI −0.20 to 0.09
Technology-enhanced PEEP optimization vs Standard care
mean difference −0.06 d (95% CI −0.20 to 0.09)
Further pooled results
| Outcome | RR (95% CI) | |
|---|---|---|
| 28-day mortality · very low-certainty evidence | 0.69 (0.52–0.93) | |
| 0.512Relative risk (log scale) |
- 28-day mortality: 10 studies; 1,719 patients; 6 technologies
Other clinical-effectiveness outcomes
- No significant differences
Cost-effectiveness
- No evidence identified
Original publication
Technology-Enhanced Strategies to Optimize Positive End-Expiratory Pressure in Patients Receiving Invasive Mechanical Ventilation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Crit Care Med. Published 13 May 2026. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →