Positive end expiratory pressure in invasive and non-invasive ventilation of COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome: computational modeling illuminates the data

  1. Liam Weaver
  2. Declan G. Bates
  3. Luigi Camporota

Reviewed by

Read the full article

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Positive end expiratory pressure (PEEP) is routinely used as part of lung protective ventilation strategies in the treatment of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). In the case of ARDS arising due to COVID-19 (CARDS), there is some debate as to whether the atypical pathophysiological characteristics of the disease which lead to hypoxaemia could warrant a modified approach to ventilator management, particularly with regards to PEEP settings. Here we review the available evidence for the existence of a unique underlying lung pathophysiology in CARDS, and for the suitability of standard approaches to setting PEEP, in both the invasive and non-invasive ventilation settings. We show how detailed computational models informed by this evidence can shed light on the available data, and help to interpret recent results in the literature.

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2021.11.15.21266157: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

    Table 2: Resources

    No key resources detected.

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.

    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.

    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.

    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  2. Version published to 10.1101/2021.11.15.21266157v1 on medRxiv