Related Experiment Video
Updated: Dec 25, 2025

Surfactant Depletion Combined with Injurious Ventilation Results in a Reproducible Model of the Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome ARDS
Published on: April 7, 2021
Lung-Protective Mechanical Ventilation Strategies in Pediatric Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome
Judith Ju Ming Wong1,2, Siew Wah Lee1,3, Herng Lee Tan1
1Children's Intensive Care Unit, Department of Pediatric Subspecialties, KK Women's and Children's Hospital, Singapore.
Insights
Implementing a lung-protective mechanical ventilation protocol in pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome improved adherence to lung-protective strategies. This approach may potentially reduce mortality in critically ill children.
Area of Science:
- Pediatric Critical Care Medicine
- Respiratory Physiology
- Mechanical Ventilation
Background:
- Lung-protective mechanical ventilation (LPMV) is standard in adults with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), but its benefit in pediatric ARDS (PARDS) remains unproven.
- This study investigates the impact of an LPMV protocol on clinical outcomes in children with PARDS.
Purpose of the Study:
- To determine if a lung-protective mechanical ventilation protocol is associated with improved clinical outcomes in pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome.
- To assess adherence to LPMV strategies and their effect on mortality and other relevant parameters.
Main Methods:
- A before-and-after pilot study design was employed from April 2016 to September 2019.
- Patients admitted to the multidisciplinary Pediatric Intensive Care Unit (PICU) meeting the Pediatric Acute Lung Injury Consensus Conference criteria for ARDS were included.
- The LPMV protocol incorporated specific targets for peak pressures, tidal volumes, PEEP/FiO2 ratios, permissive hypercapnia, and permissive hypoxemia.
Main Results:
- The study compared outcomes between a protocol group (n=63) and a non-protocol group (n=69).
- Implementation of the LPMV protocol led to adherence with lung-protective measures, including lower median tidal volumes and higher PEEP and PaCO2.
- While no significant difference in in-hospital mortality was observed initially (15.9% vs 26.1%), adjusted analysis revealed a significant decrease in mortality associated with the LPMV protocol (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.37).
- No significant differences were found in ventilator-free days or PICU-free days between the groups.
Conclusions:
- A lung-protective mechanical ventilation protocol in pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome demonstrated improved adherence to lung-protective strategies.
- The protocol was associated with a potential reduction in mortality, suggesting its clinical utility in managing PARDS.
- Further research is warranted to confirm these findings in larger cohorts.
Objectives:
Reduced morbidity and mortality associated with lung-protective mechanical ventilation is not proven in pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome. This study aims to determine if a lung-protective mechanical ventilation protocol in pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome is associated with improved clinical outcomes.
Design:
This pilot study over April 2016 to September 2019 adopts a before-and-after comparison design of a lung-protective mechanical ventilation protocol. All admissions to the PICU were screened daily for fulfillment of the Pediatric Acute Lung Injury Consensus Conference criteria and included.
Setting:
Multidisciplinary PICU.
Patients:
Patients with pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome.
Interventions:
Lung-protective mechanical ventilation protocol with elements on peak pressures, tidal volumes, end-expiratory pressure to FIO2 combinations, permissive hypercapnia, and permissive hypoxemia.
Measurements And Main Results:
Ventilator and blood gas data were collected for the first 7 days of pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome and compared between the protocol (n = 63) and nonprotocol groups (n = 69). After implementation of the protocol, median tidal volume (6.4 mL/kg [5.4-7.8 mL/kg] vs 6.0 mL/kg [4.8-7.3 mL/kg]; p = 0.005), PaO2 (78.1 mm Hg [67.0-94.6 mm Hg] vs 74.5 mm Hg [59.2-91.1 mm Hg]; p = 0.001), and oxygen saturation (97% [95-99%] vs 96% [94-98%]; p = 0.007) were lower, and end-expiratory pressure (8 cm H2O [7-9 cm H2O] vs 8 cm H2O [8-10 cm H2O]; p = 0.002] and PaCO2 (44.9 mm Hg [38.8-53.1 mm Hg] vs 46.4 mm Hg [39.4-56.7 mm Hg]; p = 0.033) were higher, in keeping with lung protective measures. There was no difference in mortality (10/63 [15.9%] vs 18/69 [26.1%]; p = 0.152), ventilator-free days (16.0 [2.0-23.0] vs 19.0 [0.0-23.0]; p = 0.697), and PICU-free days (13.0 [0.0-21.0] vs 16.0 [0.0-22.0]; p = 0.233) between the protocol and nonprotocol groups. After adjusting for severity of illness, organ dysfunction and oxygenation index, the lung-protective mechanical ventilation protocol was associated with decreased mortality (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.16-0.88).
Conclusions:
In pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome, a lung-protective mechanical ventilation protocol improved adherence to lung-protective mechanical ventilation strategies and potentially mortality.
Related Concept Videos
Acute Respiratory Failure-V
Ensure that patients are monitored continuously for their response to therapy, including changes in...
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation II: ACLS Airway Management
Ventilatory Modes
There are three ventilatory modes: full support, partial support, and spontaneous. These are described below.
Full Support Modes
Full support modes include controlled mechanical ventilation, continuous mandatory...
Mechanical Ventilation III: Noninvasive Ventilation
Noninvasive Positive-Pressure Ventilation...
Mechanical Ventilation II: Invasive Ventilation
Negative-Pressure Ventilators
Negative-pressure ventilators create a vacuum around the chest or body to draw air into the lungs, simulating breathing. This method does not require an...
Mechanical Ventilation I: Indication and Settings

