The effect of prone positioning in acute respiratory distress syndrome or acute lung injury: a meta-analysis. Areas of uncertainty and recommendations for research
- 19 March 2008
- journal article
- review article
- Published by Springer Nature in Intensive Care Medicine
- Vol. 34 (6) , 1002-1011
- https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-008-1062-3
Abstract
Objective: To compare the effects of ventilation in prone and in supine position in patients with acute lung injury/acute respiratory distress syndrome (ALI/ARDS). Design: Meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Data sources: BioMedCentral, PubMed, CINAHL, and Embase ( to November 2007), with additional information from authors. Measurements and results: From selected randomised controlled trials comparing positioning in ALI/ARDS we extracted data concerning study design, disease severity, clinical outcomes, and adverse events. Five trials including 1,372 patients met the inclusion criteria for mortality analysis; one trial was added to assess the effects on acquisition of ventilator-associated pneumonia ( VAP). The included trials were significantly underpowered and enrolled patients with varying severity. Prone positioning duration and mechanical ventilation strategy were not standardised across studies. Using a fixed-effects model, we did not find a significant effect of prone positioning (proning) on mortality ( odds ratio 0.97, 95% confidence interval 0.77-1.22). The PaO2/FiO(2) ratio increased significantly more with proning ( weighted means difference 25 mmHg, p < 0.00001). Proning was associated with a non-significant 23% reduction in the odds of VAP ( p = 0.09), and with no increase in major adverse airway complications: OR 1.01, 95% CI 0.71-1.43. Length of intensive care unit stay was marginally and not significantly increased by proning. Conclusions: Prone position is not associated with a significant reduction in mortality from ALI/ARDS despite a significant increase in PaO2/FiO(2), is safe, and tends to decrease VAP. Published studies exhibit substantial clinical heterogeneity, suggesting that an adequately sized study optimising the duration of proning and ventilation strategy is warranted to enable definitive conclusions to be drawn.Keywords
This publication has 43 references indexed in Scilit:
- Prone Position in Early and Severe Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: A Design for a Definitive Randomized Controlled TrialAnesthesia & Analgesia, 2007
- Alveolar recruitment during prone position: time mattersClinical Science, 2006
- Clinical trial design—effect of prone positioning on clinical outcomes in infants and children with acute respiratory distress syndromeJournal of Critical Care, 2006
- Comparison of prone positioning and high-frequency oscillatory ventilation in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome*Critical Care Medicine, 2005
- Prone position reduces lung stress and strain in severe acute respiratory distress syndromeEuropean Respiratory Journal, 2005
- Physical and biological triggers of ventilator-induced lung injury and its preventionEuropean Respiratory Journal, 2003
- Measuring inconsistency in meta-analysesBMJ, 2003
- Ventilation with Lower Tidal Volumes as Compared with Traditional Tidal Volumes for Acute Lung Injury and the Acute Respiratory Distress SyndromeNew England Journal of Medicine, 2000
- Increased Mortality Associated with Growth Hormone Treatment in Critically Ill AdultsNew England Journal of Medicine, 1999
- Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: Is blinding necessary?Controlled Clinical Trials, 1996