Short-Term Physiological Effects of Moderate PEEP Levels in Invasively Ventilated Patients Without Acute or Chronic Lung Disease

Background/Objectives: Positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) is a standardized component of the invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) settings to improve oxygenation; however, its physiological effects in patients with no documented prior lung disease remain poorly defined. This study evaluated the impact of moderate PEEP variations on macrohemodynamic parameters, gas exchange, and driving pressure (ΔP). Methods: This single-arm, non-randomized, crossover study included adult intensive care unit (ICU) patients with no documented prior lung disease during the early phase of IMV. Sequential PEEP levels of 6, 8, and 10 cmH2O were applied for 30 min each within the first 24 h of ICU admission, while all other ventilatory parameters were kept constant. Arterial blood gases [partial pressure of oxygen (PaO2), partial pressure of carbon dioxide (PaCO2), and arterial oxygen saturation (SaO2)], oxygenation index [PaO2/fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2)], systolic, diastolic, and mean arterial pressures, ΔP, and static compliance (Cstat) were measured. Friedman and Mann–Whitney U tests were used, with adjustment for multiple comparisons. Results: A total of 150 patients were enrolled (64.7% male). The observed mortality rate was 53.3%; however, mortality was not defined as a primary or secondary outcome, and was used only as a grouping variable for comparative analyses. Intraindividual comparison across PEEP levels of 6, 8, and 10 cmH2O showed small but significant reductions in systolic and mean arterial pressure at higher PEEP (p-value < 0.05), with Bonferroni-adjusted significance for PEEP 6 vs. 10. No significant differences were observed in oxygenation (SaO2, PaO2, and PaO2/FiO2), PaCO2, ΔP, or Cstat. These results suggest that moderate PEEP changes produced limited macrohemodynamic effects without relevant impact on gas exchange or respiratory mechanics. Overall, no clinically relevant or statistically significant differences were observed in gas exchange, macrohemodynamic parameters, ΔP, or Cstat across PEEP levels when mortality was used as the grouping variable. Among survivors, higher PEEP was associated with modest reductions in systolic and mean arterial pressures and higher PaCO2 values; however, these findings did not translate into consistent physiological benefits. Conclusions: In mechanically ventilated patients with no documented prior lung disease, PEEP may exert divergent effects on macrohemodynamics, gas exchange, and ΔP, supporting a cautious and individualized approach to PEEP selection in this population.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Medical Sciences
Published
2026-03-27
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/medsci14020168
Primary Topic
Respiratory Support and Mechanisms
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Short-Term Physiological Effects of Moderate PEEP Levels in Invasively Ventilated Patients Without Acute or Chronic Lung Disease

FERNANDO AUGUSTO LIMA MARSON, Camila Vantini Capasso Palamim
Medical Sciences
Respiratory Support and Mechanisms
article

Short-Term Physiological Effects of Moderate PEEP Levels in Invasively Ventilated Patients Without Acute or Chronic Lung Disease

FERNANDO AUGUSTO LIMA MARSON, Camila Vantini Capasso Palamim
article en

Abstract

Background/Objectives: Positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) is a standardized component of the invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) settings to improve oxygenation; however, its physiological effects in patients with no documented prior lung disease remain poorly defined. This study evaluated the impact of moderate PEEP variations on macrohemodynamic parameters, gas exchange, and driving pressure (ΔP). Methods: This single-arm, non-randomized, crossover study included adult intensive care unit (ICU) patients with no documented prior lung disease during the early phase of IMV. Sequential PEEP levels of 6, 8, and 10 cmH2O were applied for 30 min each within the first 24 h of ICU admission, while all other ventilatory parameters were kept constant. Arterial blood gases [partial pressure of oxygen (PaO2), partial pressure of carbon dioxide (PaCO2), and arterial oxygen saturation (SaO2)], oxygenation index [PaO2/fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2)], systolic, diastolic, and mean arterial pressures, ΔP, and static compliance (Cstat) were measured. Friedman and Mann–Whitney U tests were used, with adjustment for multiple comparisons. Results: A total of 150 patients were enrolled (64.7% male). The observed mortality rate was 53.3%; however, mortality was not defined as a primary or secondary outcome, and was used only as a grouping variable for comparative analyses. Intraindividual comparison across PEEP levels of 6, 8, and 10 cmH2O showed small but significant reductions in systolic and mean arterial pressure at higher PEEP (p-value < 0.05), with Bonferroni-adjusted significance for PEEP 6 vs. 10. No significant differences were observed in oxygenation (SaO2, PaO2, and PaO2/FiO2), PaCO2, ΔP, or Cstat. These results suggest that moderate PEEP changes produced limited macrohemodynamic effects without relevant impact on gas exchange or respiratory mechanics. Overall, no clinically relevant or statistically significant differences were observed in gas exchange, macrohemodynamic parameters, ΔP, or Cstat across PEEP levels when mortality was used as the grouping variable. Among survivors, higher PEEP was associated with modest reductions in systolic and mean arterial pressures and higher PaCO2 values; however, these findings did not translate into consistent physiological benefits. Conclusions: In mechanically ventilated patients with no documented prior lung disease, PEEP may exert divergent effects on macrohemodynamics, gas exchange, and ΔP, supporting a cautious and individualized approach to PEEP selection in this population.

Medical SciencesVol. 14(2)
Universidade São Francisco (BR)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
Respiratory Support and Mechanisms
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.