The Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Network. Ventilation with lower tidal volumes as compared with traditional tidal volumes for acute lung injury and the acute respiratory distress syndrome. N Engl J Med, 2000; 342(18):1301–1308.
3.
HagerDN, KrishnanJA, HaydenDL, BrowerRG. Tidal volume reduction in patients with acute lung injury when plateau pressures are not high. Am J Respir Crit Care Med, 2005; 172(10):1241–1245.
4.
JardinF, Vieillard-BaronA. Is there a safe plateau pressure in ARDS? The right heart only knows. Intensive Care Med, 2007; 33(3):444–447.
5.
Mireles-CabodevilaE, ChatburnRL, ThurmanTL, ZabalaLM, HoltSJ, SwearingenCJ, HeulittMJ. Application of mid-frequency ventilation in an animal model of lung injury: a pilot study. Respir Care, 2014; 59(11):1619–1627.
6.
Mireles-CabodevilaE, ChatburnRL. Mid-frequency ventilation: unconventional use of conventional mechanical ventilation as a lung-protection strategy. Respir Care, 2008; 53(12):1669–1677.
7.
MariniJJ, CrookePS3rd, TruwitJD. Determinants and limits of pressure-preset ventilation: a mathematical model of pressure control. J Appl Physiol, 1989; 67(3):1081–1092.
8.
The HIFI Study Group. High-frequency oscillatory ventilation compared with conventional mechanical ventilation in the treatment of respiratory failure in preterm infants. N Engl J Med, 1989; 320(2):88–93.
9.
FergusonND, CookDJ, GuyattGH, MehtaS, HandL, AustinP, et al. High-frequency oscillation in early acute respiratory distress syndrome. N Engl J Med, 2013; 368(9):795–805.
10.
Mekontso DessapA, CharronC, DevaquetJ, AboabJ, JardinF, BrochardL, Vieillard-BaronA. Impact of acute hypercapnia and augmented positive end-expiratory pressure on right ventricle function in severe acute respiratory distress syndrome. Intensive Care Med, 2009; 35(11):1850–1858.
11.
VlahakisNE, HubmayrRD. Cellular stress failure in ventilator-injured lungs. Am J Respir Crit Care Med, 2005; 171(12):1328–1342.
12.
BeinT, Weber-CarstensS, GoldmannA, MüllerT, StaudingerT, BrederlauJ, et al. Lower tidal volume strategy (≈3 mL/kg) combined with extracorporeal CO2 removal versus ‘conventional’ protective ventilation (6 mL/kg) in severe ARDS: The prospective randomized Xtravent-study. Intensive Care Med, 2013; 39(5):847–856.
