Setting positive end-expiratory pressure: does the ‘best compliance’ concept really work?

Abstract

Purpose of review Determining the optimal positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) setting remains a central yet debated issue in the management of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). The ‘best compliance’ strategy set the PEEP to coincide with the peak respiratory system compliance (or 2 cmH2O higher) during a decremental PEEP trial, but evidence is conflicting. Recent findings The physiological rationale that best compliance is always representative of functional residual capacity and recruitment has raised serious concerns about its efficacy and safety, due to its association with increased 28-day all-cause mortality in a randomized clinical trial in ARDS patients. Moreover, compliance measurement was shown to underestimate the effects of overdistension, and neglect intra-tidal recruitment, airway closure, and the interaction between lung and chest wall mechanics, especially in obese patients. In response to these concerns, alternative approaches such as recruitment-to-inflation ratio, the nitrogen wash-in/wash-out technique, and electrical impedance tomography (EIT) are gaining attention to assess recruitment and overdistention more reliably and precisely. Summary The traditional ‘best compliance’ strategy for determining optimal PEEP settings in ARDS carries risks and overlooks some key physiological aspects. The advent of new technologies and methods presents more reliable strategies to assess recruitment and overdistention, facilitating personalized approaches to PEEP optimization.