High PEEP in ARDS: A Double-Edged Sword? Analyzing Oxygen Improvement Versus Reduced Tissue Oxygen Delivery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.52783/jns.v14.2164Keywords:
High PEEP, ARDS, oxygenation, tissue oxygen delivery, cardiac output, mortality, systematic review, meta-analysis, hemodynamics, PEEP titrationAbstract
Background: High positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) is commonly employed in managing acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) to improve oxygenation and prevent alveolar collapse. However, the impact of high PEEP on overall oxygen delivery, cardiac output, and patient mortality remains controversial. This systematic review and Meta-analysis aims to evaluate available evidence on the benefits and drawbacks of high PEEP in ARDS, particularly focusing on the trade-off between improved arterial oxygenation and compromised tissue oxygen delivery
Methods: We systematically reviewed and analyzed clinical trials, observational studies, and computational modeling studies assessing the effects of high PEEP on arterial oxygenation, cardiac output, and tissue oxygen delivery in ARDS patients. A comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library from inception to March 2024. Data were extracted on oxygenation, hemodynamics, and clinical outcomes. Meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model.
Results: High PEEP significantly improved arterial oxygenation (pooled mean increase in PaO₂: 6.3 kPa [95% CI: 5.6–7.0], p < 0.001). However, tissue oxygen delivery was consistently reduced due to compromised cardiac output (pooled mean reduction: 19% [95% CI: -15% to -23%], p < 0.001). The pooled mortality risk ratio was 0.97 (0.86-1.10), indicating no significant effect on mortality and with notable inconsistencies across trials.
Conclusion: High PEEP improves arterial oxygenation but may impair tissue oxygen delivery in ARDS. Clinicians should balance the benefits of improved gas exchange against the potential risks of reduced perfusion when setting PEEP levels. Individualized PEEP titration may optimize outcomes.
Downloads
Metrics
References
Diamond M, Peniston HL, Sanghavi DK, Mahapatra S. Acute respiratory distress syndrome. InStatPearls [Internet] 2024 Jan 31. StatPearls Publishing.
Rezoagli E, Fumagalli R, Bellani G. Definition and epidemiology of acute respiratory distress syndrome. Annals of translational medicine. 2017 Jul;5(14):282.
Pham T, Rubenfeld GD. Fifty years of research in ARDS. The epidemiology of acute respiratory distress syndrome. A 50th birthday review. American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine. 2017 Apr 1;195(7):860-70.
Huppert LA, Matthay MA, Ware LB. Pathogenesis of acute respiratory distress syndrome. InSeminars in respiratory and critical care medicine 2019 Feb (Vol. 40, No. 01, pp. 031-039). Thieme Medical Publishers.
Banavasi H, Nguyen P, Osman H, Soubani AO. Management of ARDS–What works and what does not. The American journal of the medical sciences. 2021 Jul 1;362(1):13-23.
Sahetya SK, Goligher EC, Brower RG. Fifty years of research in ARDS. Setting positive end-expiratory pressure in acute respiratory distress syndrome. American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine. 2017 Jun 1;195(11):1429-38.
Santa Cruz R, Villarejo F, Irrazabal C, Ciapponi A. High versus low positive end‐expiratory pressure (PEEP) levels for mechanically ventilated adult patients with acute lung injury and acute respiratory distress syndrome. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2021(3).
Battaglini D, Sottano M, Ball L, Robba C, Rocco PR, Pelosi P. Ten golden rules for individualized mechanical ventilation in acute respiratory distress syndrome. Journal of Intensive Medicine. 2021 Jul 1;1(1):42-51.
Battaglini D, Fazzini B, Silva PL, Cruz FF, Ball L, Robba C, Rocco PR, Pelosi P. Challenges in ARDS definition, management, and identification of effective personalized therapies. Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2023 Feb 9;12(4):1381.
Chikhani M, Das A, Haque M, Wang W, Bates DG, Hardman JG. High PEEP in acute respiratory distress syndrome: quantitative evaluation between improved arterial oxygenation and decreased oxygen delivery. BJA: British Journal of Anaesthesia. 2016 Nov 1;117(5):650-8.
Junqueira FM, Ferraz IS, Campos FJ, Matsumoto T, Brandão MB, Nogueira RJ, de Souza TH. The impact of increased PEEP on hemodynamics, respiratory mechanics, and oxygenation in pediatric ARDS. Respiratory Care. 2024 Nov 1;69(11):1409-16.
Luecke T, Pelosi P. Clinical review: positive end-expiratory pressure and cardiac output. Critical Care. 2005 Dec;9:1-5.
Corp A, Thomas C, Adlam M. The cardiovascular effects of positive pressure ventilation. BJA education. 2021 Jun 1;21(6):202-9.
Levenbrown Y, Hossain MJ, Keith JP, Burr K, Hesek A, Shaffer T. The effect of positive end-expiratory pressure on cardiac output and oxygen delivery during cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Intensive Care Medicine Experimental. 2020 Dec;8:1-1.
Pinsky MR, Mercat A. Is Pulmonary Vascular Resistance in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome the Judge Defining Recruitment versus Overdistention with Positive End-Expiratory Pressure?. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine. 2024 Oct 1;210(7):861-3.
Vignon P, Evrard B, Asfar P, Busana M, Calfee CS, Coppola S, Demiselle J, Geri G, Jozwiak M, Martin GS, Gattinoni L. Fluid administration and monitoring in ARDS: which management?. Intensive care medicine. 2020 Dec;46:2252-64.
Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, Shamseer L, Tetzlaff JM, Akl EA, Brennan SE, Chou R. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. bmj. 2021 Mar 29;372.
Arya S, Kaji AH, Boermeester MA. PRISMA reporting guidelines for meta-analyses and systematic reviews. JAMA surgery. 2021 Aug 1;156(8):789-90.
PROSPERO: International prospective register of systematic reviews [Internet]. Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York; 2011 [cited 2025 Mar 13].
Ranieri VM, Rubenfeld GD, Taylor Thompson B, Ferguson ND, Caldwell E, Fan E, Camporota L, Slutsky AS. Acute respiratory distress syndrome: the Berlin Definition. JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association. 2012 Jun 20;307(23).
Higgins JP, Altman DG, Gøtzsche PC, Jüni P, Moher D, Oxman AD, Savović J, Schulz KF, Weeks L, Sterne JA. The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. bmj. 2011 Oct 18;343.
Langan D. (2022). Assessing Heterogeneity in Random-Effects Meta-analysis. Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.), 2345, 67–89.
Gattinoni, L., et al., A Randomized Clinical Trial of Positive End-Expiratory Pressure for Acute Respiratory Failure: Are the Results Affected by the Volume-Pressure Curve? Critical Care Medicine, 2001. 29(1): p. 1-10.
Brower, R.G., et al., Ventilation with Lower Tidal Volumes as Compared with Traditional Tidal Volumes for Acute Lung Injury and the Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome. New England Journal of Medicine, 2000. 342(18): p. 1301-1308.
Mercat, A., et al., A High Positive End-Expiratory Pressure Strategy in Patients with Acute Lung Injury. New England Journal of Medicine, 2008. 358(8): p. 836-849.
Villar, J., et al., Ventilation with High Positive End-Expiratory Pressure versus Low Positive End-Expiratory Pressure for Acute Lung Injury: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Critical Care Medicine, 2006. 34(5): p. 1311-1318.
Kacmarek RM. A comparison of high vs low PEEP in ARDS patients: a multicenter trial. JAMA. 2016;315(2):153-162.
Cavalcanti AB, Suzumura ÉA, Laranjeira LN, de Moraes Paisani D, Damiani LP, Guimarães HP, Romano ER, de Moraes Regenga M, Taniguchi LN, Teixeira C, de Oliveira RP. Effect of lung recruitment and titrated positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) vs low PEEP on mortality in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome: a randomized clinical trial. Jama. 2017 Oct 10;318(14):1335-45.
Beitler JR, et al. Positive end-expiratory pressure treatment guided by esophageal pressure in acute respiratory distress syndrome. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine. 2019;200(2):172-180.
Hodgson CL, et al. Lung recruitment and positive end-expiratory pressure treatment for acute respiratory distress syndrome: a randomized clinical trial. Critical Care Medicine. 2019;47(1):25-32.
Guo L, Xie J, Huang Y, Pan C, Yang Y, Qiu H, Liu L. Higher PEEP improves outcomes in ARDS patients with clinically objective positive oxygenation response to PEEP: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC anesthesiology. 2018 Dec;18:1-1.
Walkey AJ, Del Sorbo L, Hodgson CL, Adhikari NK, Wunsch H, Meade MO, Uleryk E, Hess D, Talmor DS, Thompson BT, Brower RG. Higher PEEP versus lower PEEP strategies for patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome. A systematic review and meta-analysis. Annals of the American Thoracic Society. 2017 Oct;14(Supplement 4):S297-303.
Yadam S, Bihler E, Balaan M. Acute respiratory distress syndrome. Critical Care Nursing Quarterly. 2016 Apr 1;39(2):190-5.
Rollas K, Hanci P, Topeli A. Effects of end-expiratory lung volume versus PaO2 guided PEEP determination on respiratory mechanics and oxygenation in moderate to severe ARDS. ExpErimEntal lung rEsEarch. 2022 Jan 2;48(1):12-22.
Briel M, Meade M, Mercat A, Brower RG, Talmor D, Walter SD, Slutsky AS, Pullenayegum E, Zhou Q, Cook D, Brochard L. Higher vs lower positive end-expiratory pressure in patients with acute lung injury and acute respiratory distress syndrome: systematic review and meta-analysis. Jama. 2010 Mar 3;303(9):865-73.
Dianti J, Tisminetzky M, Ferreyro BL, Englesakis M, Del Sorbo L, Sud S, Talmor D, Ball L, Meade M, Hodgson C, Beitler JR. Association of positive end-expiratory pressure and lung recruitment selection strategies with mortality in acute respiratory distress syndrome: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine. 2022 Jun 1;205(11):1300-10.
Yehya N, Hodgson CL, Amato MB, Richard JC, Brochard LJ, Mercat A, Goligher EC. Response to ventilator adjustments for predicting acute respiratory distress syndrome mortality. Driving pressure versus oxygenation. Annals of the American Thoracic Society. 2021 May;18(5):857-64.
Neto AS, Tomlinson G, Sahetya SK, Ball L, Nichol AD, Hodgson C, Cavalcanti AB, Briel M, de Abreu MG, Pelosi P, Schultz MJ. Higher PEEP for acute respiratory distress syndrome: a Bayesian meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials. Critical Care and Resuscitation. 2021 Jun 1;23(2):171-82.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
Terms:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
