Cited by 601Respiratory Support and MechanismsNeonatal Respiratory Health ResearchNosocomial Infections in ICU

Prone Position for Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome. A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Open access
Munshi, Laveena, Del Sorbo, Lorenzo, Adhikari, Neill K. J., Hodgson, Carol L., Wunsch, Hannah, Meade, Maureen O., Uleryk, Elizabeth, Mancebo, Jordi +3 more·2017·Annals of the American Thoracic Society

Abstract

Rationale: The application of prone positioning for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) has evolved, with recent trials focusing on patients with more severe ARDS, and applying prone ventilation for more prolonged periods. Objectives: This review evaluates the effect of prone positioning on 28-day mortality (primary outcome) compared with conventional mechanical ventilation in the supine position for adults with ARDS. Methods: We updated the literature search from a systematic review published in 2010, searching MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL (through to August 2016). We included randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) comparing prone to supine positioning in mechanically ventilated adults with ARDS, and conducted sensitivity analyses to explore the effects of duration of prone ventilation, concurrent lung-protective ventilation and ARDS severity. Secondary outcomes included PaO2/FiO2 ratio on Day 4 and an evaluation of adverse events. Meta-analyses used random effects models. Methodologic quality of the RCTs was evaluated using the Cochrane risk of bias instrument, and methodologic quality of the overall body of evidence was evaluated using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) guidelines. Results: Eight RCTs fulfilled entry criteria, and included 2,129 patients (1,093 [51%] proned). Meta-analysis revealed no difference in mortality (risk ratio [RR], 0.84; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.68–1.04), but subgroup analyses found lower mortality with 12 hours or greater duration prone (five trials; RR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.56–0.99) and for patients with moderate to severe ARDS (five trials; RR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.56–0.99). PaO2/FiO2 ratio on Day 4 for all patients was significantly higher in the prone positioning group (mean difference, 23.5; 95% CI, 12.4–34.5). Prone positioning was associated with higher rates of endotracheal tube obstruction and pressure sores. Risk of bias was low across the trials. Conclusions: Prone positioning is likely to reduce mortality among patients with severe ARDS when applied for at least 12 hours daily.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1513/annalsats.201704-343ot

Cites

29 of 29 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • This repeat meta-analysis confirmed that in patients with ARDS and a PaO2/FiO2 ratio < 200, the use of prone compared with supine position within the first 36 h of intubation, when performed for > 12 h a day, showed improved survival.

    “This repeat meta-analysis confirmed the results from the previous published work: In patients with ARDS and a PaO2/FiO2 ratio < 200, the use of prone compared with supine position within the first 36 h of intubation, when performed for > 12 h a day, showed improved survival.”
  • Meta-analysis including this study demonstrated reduced mortality in severe ARDS patients treated with prone compared with supine position (RR 0.74; 95% CI 0.56-0.99) as well as improved oxygenation as measured by change in PaO2/FiO2 ratio (median 23.5 higher; 95% CI 12.4-34.5 higher).

    “Meta-analysis including this study demonstrated reduced mortality in severe ARDS patients treated with prone compared with supine position (RR 0.74; 95% CI 0.56–0.99) as well as improved oxygenation as measured by change in PaO2/FiO2 ratio (median 23.5 higher; 95% CI 12.4–34.5 higher) [454].”
  • In 2017, a meta-analysis was published that was updated from a previous meta-analysis published in 2010, to which only 1 study, the PROSEVA trial, published in 2013 was added.

    “In 2017, a meta-analysis was published [454] that was updated from a previous meta-analysis published in 2010 [455], to which only 1 study, the PROSEVA trial, published in 2013 [456] was added.”
  • While prone position may be associated with potentially life-threatening complications including accidental removal of the endotracheal tube, this was not evident in pooled analysis (RR 1.09; 95% CI 0.85-1.39).

    “While prone position may be associated with potentially life-threatening complications including accidental removal of the endotracheal tube, this was not evident in pooled analysis (RR 1.09; 95% CI 0.85–1.39).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Munshi, L., Del Sorbo, L., Adhikari, N. K. J., Hodgson, C. L., Wunsch, H., Meade, M. O., Uleryk, E., Mancebo, J., Pesenti, A., Ranieri, V. M., & Fan, E.
Affiliations
  • Toronto General Hospital (CA)
  • Interdepartmental Division of Critical Care Medicine, Toronto General Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
  • Sunnybrook Health Science Centre (CA)
  • Monash University (AU)
  • University of Toronto (CA)
  • McMaster University (CA)
  • Hospital for Sick Children (CA)
  • Université de Montréal (CA)
  • University of Milan (IT)
  • Policlinico Umberto I (IT)
Corresponding author
Fan, Eddy
Venue
Annals of the American Thoracic Society
Published
2017-10-01
Volume
14
Issue
Supplement_4
Pages
S280-S288
ISSN
  • 2325-6621 (ISSN-L)
  • 2329-6933
OpenAlex
W2766327047
Cited by
601
References
29
Citations by year
2026: 28 · 2025: 39 · 2024: 56 · 2023: 82 · 2022: 114 · 2021: 125 · 2020: 122 · 2019: 20 · 2018: 13 · 2015: 1
FWCI
7.74
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Annals of the American Thoracic Society (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Archivio Istituzionale della Ricerca (Universita Degli Studi Di Milano) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Archivio istituzionale della ricerca (Alma Mater Studiorum Università di Bologna) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Respiratory Support and Mechanisms
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Neonatal Respiratory Health Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine › Nosocomial Infections in ICU
Keywords
prone positioning, acute respiratory distress syndrome, prone ventilation, 28-day mortality, PaO2/FiO2 ratio, lung-protective ventilation, ARDS severity, endotracheal tube obstruction, pressure ulcers, mechanical ventilation
MeSH terms
Adult, Critical Care, Pressure Ulcer, Humans, Intubation, Intratracheal, Respiration, Artificial, Respiratory Distress Syndrome, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Prone Position

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review