Evidence Hub

The impact of PEEP-guided electrical impedance tomography on oxygenation and respiratory mechanics in moderate-to-severe ARDS: a randomized controlled trial

Trung Van Dinh, G. Bui, Tuan Quoc Dang, T. Nguyen, T. T. Pham, Cuong Van Bui, Cương Bá Nguyễn, Anh The Trinh et al.

Scientific Reports, 2025

108 participants · 12 citations

Abstract

Electrical impedance tomography (EIT)–guided positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) titration may optimize ventilation and reduce ventilator-induced lung injury in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). We compared EIT-guided PEEP with low PEEP/FiO₂ strategy in patients with moderate-to-severe ARDS. In this randomized controlled trial, 108 patients with PaO₂/FiO₂ below 200 mmHg were allocated to EIT-guided PEEP after a recruitment maneuver (n = 56) or low PEEP/FiO₂ strategy (n = 52). Patients in the EIT group underwent PEEP titration guided by the intersection point between alveolar overdistension and collapse during a decremental PEEP trial. Primary outcomes were oxygenation (PaO₂/FiO₂) and static compliance. Secondary outcomes included mortality, ventilator-free days, ICU stay, barotrauma, rescue therapies, and sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score changes. On day 1, oxygenation was higher with EIT (mean PaO₂/FiO₂ 180 vs. 159 mmHg; p = 0.036). Static compliance was greater at both day 1 (26 vs. 23 mL/cmH₂O; p = 0.016) and day 2 (27 vs. 24 mL/cmH₂O; p = 0.029). Driving pressure was lower with EIT at day 1 (16 vs. 17 cmH₂O; p < 0.001) and day 2 (15 vs. 17 cmH₂O; p = 0.005). SOFA scores improved more in the EIT group (day 1: − 1 vs. 0, p = 0.013; day 2: − 1 vs. − 0.5, p = 0.015). Twenty-eight–day mortality was lower with EIT (29 vs. 44%), although not statistically significant (p = 0.090). ICU stay, ventilation duration, barotrauma, ECMO use, and rescue…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 108 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free