PubHawk
Br J Anaesth March 2025 PMID 39592365

Effect of a driving pressure-limiting strategy for patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome secondary to community-acquired pneumonia: the STAMINA randomised clinical trial.

Israel Silva Maia, Alexandre Biasi Cavalcanti, Lucas Tramujas, Viviane Cordeiro Veiga, Júlia Souza Oliveira, Erica Regina Ribeiro Sady, Letícia Galvão Barbante, Marina Lazzari Nicola, Rodrigo Magalhães Gurgel, Lucas Petri Damiani, Karina Leal Negrelli, Tamiris Abait Miranda, Ligia Nasi Laranjeira, Bruno Tomazzini, Cassio Zandonai

Full text PDF Download social card

Mentions

17
Peak: 11 in Nov 2024
across 4 sources since Nov 2024

Extended reach

30,075
potential audience

Total likes

99

Video views

783

Mentions per month

Nov 2024 – May 2025

Where it's discussed

  • X / Twitter12 posts
  • YouTube2 videos
  • Blogs2 articles
  • Bluesky1 posts

AI synopsis

What people are saying

The group's discussions revolve around the main conclusion that the pressure-limiting strategy did not improve patient outcomes, with posts referencing the trial's comparison between different ventilation strategies, like 'a driving pressure-guided strategy did not increase ventilator-free days.' The tone remains analytical and factual, reflecting an understanding of the study's neutral impact on clinical approaches.

AgreementNeither agree nor disagree

Most discussions acknowledge that the study showed no significant benefit of the driving pressure-limiting strategy, reflecting a neutral stance overall.

InterestModerate interest

The posts demonstrate moderate interest, with some sharing of findings and interpretations, but little exploration of deeper implications.

EngagementModerate engagement

Discussions include citations of specific results, such as the comparison with ARDSNet and mentions of ventilator-free days, indicating thoughtful engagement.

ImpactNeutral impact

The overall consensus suggests limited immediate impact on clinical practice, as the findings did not demonstrate a clear benefit, though some posts consider future research directions.

Abstract in brief

  • This study evaluated whether a driving pressure-limiting ventilation strategy, based on PEEP titration according to lung compliance, could increase ventilator-free days in patients with moderate to severe ARDS from community-acquired pneumonia, but found no significant benefit.
  • The trial was stopped early after enrolling 214 patients due to recruitment difficulties, with 198 patients analyzed, revealing no significant difference in ventilator-free days or mortality outcomes between the intervention and control groups.
  • Overall, implementing a driving pressure-limiting approach did not improve outcomes compared to a standard low PEEP strategy in this patient population.]
Read the full abstract

Top posts

Most liked on X and Bluesky
ケースケ@LessIsMoreICU
@lessismoreicu · X

市中肺炎に続発する中~重症ARDSにおいて、ΔP制限戦略(PEEPを最良の静的呼吸器系コンプライアンスで設定+ΔP≦14)は標準的な低PEEP戦略(ARDSnetの低PEEP表)と比べ、28日以内の非レスピ日数を増加させなかった、というRCT。 ΔPうんぬんよりPEEPはnetの表で悪くないのなってゆう https://t.co/wTYtLNdusb

Nov 30, 2024 · 44 likes · 8 shares · 5,990 followers View post →
Steven Mathern
@stevenmathern.bsky.social · Bluesky

'In patients with moderate to severe ARDS secondary to community-acquired pneumonia, a driving pressure-limiting strategy did not increase the number of ventilator-free days compared with a standard low PEEP strategy' #critcaresky #emimcc pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39592365/

Nov 27, 2024 · 6 likes · 4 shares View post →
Angelo Roncalli
@curso_vm · X

Compared with ARDSNet, a driving pressure-guided strategy did not increase ventilator-free days. https://t.co/0vaLxGV3vl

Nov 27, 2024 · 3 likes · 2,967 followers View post →
UAlberta Crit Care
@UAlberta_ICU · X

Effect of a driving pressure-limiting strategy for patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome secondary to community-acquired pneumonia: the STAMINA randomised clinical trial. See new work with contributions from @f_g_zampieri @UAlberta_FoMD https://t.co/CQJk44AyBk

Dec 12, 2024 · 1 like · 1,341 followers View post →
茨城の「墨子」に俺はなる！ひたちなかGIM：柴﨑俊一
@sn1shibazaki · X

RT @lessismoreicu: 市中肺炎に続発する中~重症ARDSにおいて、ΔP制限戦略(PEEPを最良の静的呼吸器系コンプライアンスで設定+ΔP≦14)は標準的な低PEEP戦略(ARDSnetの低PEEP表)と比べ、28日以内の非レスピ日数を増加させなかった、というRC…

Nov 30, 2024 · 8 shares · 7,301 followers View post →
ケースケ@LessIsMoreICU
@lessismoreicu · X

RT @lessismoreicu: 市中肺炎に続発する中~重症ARDSにおいて、ΔP制限戦略(PEEPを最良の静的呼吸器系コンプライアンスで設定+ΔP≦14)は標準的な低PEEP戦略(ARDSnetの低PEEP表)と比べ、28日以内の非レスピ日数を増加させなかった、というRC…

Nov 30, 2024 · 8 shares · 5,990 followers View post →

All mentions

georgepapadapol
@georgepapadapol · X

3. Effect of a driving pressure-limiting strategy for patients with #ARDS secondary to #CAP -The Ventilator Strategy for Community Acquired Pneumonia (STAMINA) study was a multicenter, randomized trial comparing a driving-pressure limited strategy to a standard low PEEP https://t.co/iGWrjvdnBV

May 24, 2025 · 1,253 followers View post →
UAlberta Crit Care
@UAlberta_ICU · X

Effect of a driving pressure-limiting strategy for patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome secondary to community-acquired pneumonia: the STAMINA randomised clinical trial. See new work with contributions from @f_g_zampieri @UAlberta_FoMD https://t.co/CQJk44AyBk

Dec 12, 2024 · 1 like · 1,341 followers View post →
ケースケ@LessIsMoreICU
@lessismoreicu · X

RT @lessismoreicu: 市中肺炎に続発する中~重症ARDSにおいて、ΔP制限戦略(PEEPを最良の静的呼吸器系コンプライアンスで設定+ΔP≦14)は標準的な低PEEP戦略(ARDSnetの低PEEP表)と比べ、28日以内の非レスピ日数を増加させなかった、というRC…

Nov 30, 2024 · 8 shares · 5,990 followers View post →
Boo
@juiice555 · X

RT @lessismoreicu: 市中肺炎に続発する中~重症ARDSにおいて、ΔP制限戦略(PEEPを最良の静的呼吸器系コンプライアンスで設定+ΔP≦14)は標準的な低PEEP戦略(ARDSnetの低PEEP表)と比べ、28日以内の非レスピ日数を増加させなかった、というRC…

Nov 30, 2024 · 8 shares · 130 followers View post →
おれんじ色
@orangeiro7 · X

RT @lessismoreicu: 市中肺炎に続発する中~重症ARDSにおいて、ΔP制限戦略(PEEPを最良の静的呼吸器系コンプライアンスで設定+ΔP≦14)は標準的な低PEEP戦略(ARDSnetの低PEEP表)と比べ、28日以内の非レスピ日数を増加させなかった、というRC…

Nov 30, 2024 · 8 shares · 1,819 followers View post →
茨城の「墨子」に俺はなる！ひたちなかGIM：柴﨑俊一
@sn1shibazaki · X

RT @lessismoreicu: 市中肺炎に続発する中~重症ARDSにおいて、ΔP制限戦略(PEEPを最良の静的呼吸器系コンプライアンスで設定+ΔP≦14)は標準的な低PEEP戦略(ARDSnetの低PEEP表)と比べ、28日以内の非レスピ日数を増加させなかった、というRC…

Nov 30, 2024 · 8 shares · 7,301 followers View post →
あっきー
@moto_moto_moto · X

RT @lessismoreicu: 市中肺炎に続発する中~重症ARDSにおいて、ΔP制限戦略(PEEPを最良の静的呼吸器系コンプライアンスで設定+ΔP≦14)は標準的な低PEEP戦略(ARDSnetの低PEEP表)と比べ、28日以内の非レスピ日数を増加させなかった、というRC…

Nov 30, 2024 · 8 shares · 1,203 followers View post →
Dr.Koo
@drkoo1219 · X

RT @lessismoreicu: 市中肺炎に続発する中~重症ARDSにおいて、ΔP制限戦略(PEEPを最良の静的呼吸器系コンプライアンスで設定+ΔP≦14)は標準的な低PEEP戦略(ARDSnetの低PEEP表)と比べ、28日以内の非レスピ日数を増加させなかった、というRC…

Nov 30, 2024 · 8 shares · 16 followers View post →
moleskine
@moleskine8 · X

RT @lessismoreicu: 市中肺炎に続発する中~重症ARDSにおいて、ΔP制限戦略(PEEPを最良の静的呼吸器系コンプライアンスで設定+ΔP≦14)は標準的な低PEEP戦略(ARDSnetの低PEEP表)と比べ、28日以内の非レスピ日数を増加させなかった、というRC…

Nov 30, 2024 · 8 shares · 510 followers View post →
［C.I.M］corrupto ingeniero maquinaria（旧ろっとん）
@machineryMPS · X

RT @lessismoreicu: 市中肺炎に続発する中~重症ARDSにおいて、ΔP制限戦略(PEEPを最良の静的呼吸器系コンプライアンスで設定+ΔP≦14)は標準的な低PEEP戦略(ARDSnetの低PEEP表)と比べ、28日以内の非レスピ日数を増加させなかった、というRC…

Nov 30, 2024 · 8 shares · 621 followers View post →
ケースケ@LessIsMoreICU
@lessismoreicu · X

市中肺炎に続発する中~重症ARDSにおいて、ΔP制限戦略(PEEPを最良の静的呼吸器系コンプライアンスで設定+ΔP≦14)は標準的な低PEEP戦略(ARDSnetの低PEEP表)と比べ、28日以内の非レスピ日数を増加させなかった、というRCT。 ΔPうんぬんよりPEEPはnetの表で悪くないのなってゆう https://t.co/wTYtLNdusb

Nov 30, 2024 · 44 likes · 8 shares · 5,990 followers View post →
Steven Mathern
@stevenmathern.bsky.social · Bluesky

'In patients with moderate to severe ARDS secondary to community-acquired pneumonia, a driving pressure-limiting strategy did not increase the number of ventilator-free days compared with a standard low PEEP strategy' #critcaresky #emimcc pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39592365/

Nov 27, 2024 · 6 likes · 4 shares View post →
Angelo Roncalli
@curso_vm · X

Compared with ARDSNet, a driving pressure-guided strategy did not increase ventilator-free days. https://t.co/0vaLxGV3vl

Nov 27, 2024 · 3 likes · 2,967 followers View post →