RESUMEN

The prone position is an immediately available and easily implemented procedure that was introduced more than 50 years ago as a method for improvement of gas exchange in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). In the meantime, a survival advantage could also be shown in patients with severe ARDS, which led to the recommendation of the prone position for treatment of severe ARDS by expert consensus and specialist society guidelines. The continuing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic moved the prone position to the forefront of medicine, including the widespread implementation of the prone position for awake, spontaneously breathing nonintubated patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory insufficiency. The survival advantage is possible due to a reduction of the ventilator-associated lung damage. In this article, the physiological effects, data on clinical results, practical considerations and open questions with respect to the prone position are discussed.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Normally aerated lung tissue on computed tomography (CT) is correlated with static respiratory system compliance (Crs) at zero end-expiratory pressure. In clinical practice, however, patients with acute respiratory failure are often managed using elevated PEEP levels. No study has validated the relationship between lung volume and tissue and Crs at the applied positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP). Therefore, this study aimed to demonstrate the relationship between lung volume and tissue on CT and Crs during the application of PEEP for the clinical management of patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome due to COVID-19. Additionally, as a secondary outcome, the study aimed to evaluate the relationship between CT characteristics and Crs, considering recruitability using the recruitment-to-inflation ratio (R/I ratio). We analyzed the CT and respiratory mechanics data of 30 patients with COVID-19 who were mechanically ventilated. The CT images were acquired during mechanical ventilation at PEEP level of 15 cmH2O and were quantitatively analyzed using Synapse Vincent system version 6.4 (Fujifilm Corporation, Tokyo, Japan). Recruitability was stratified into two groups, high and low recruitability, based on the median R/I ratio of our study population. Thirty patients were included in the analysis with the median R/I ratio of 0.71. A significant correlation was observed between Crs at the applied PEEP (median 15 [interquartile range (IQR) 12.2, 15.8]) and the normally aerated lung volume (r = 0.70 [95% CI 0.46-0.85], P < 0.001) and tissue (r = 0.70 [95% CI 0.46-0.85], P < 0.001). Multivariable linear regression revealed that recruitability (Coefficient = - 390.9 [95% CI - 725.0 to - 56.8], P = 0.024) and Crs (Coefficient = 48.9 [95% CI 32.6-65.2], P < 0.001) were significantly associated with normally aerated lung volume (R-squared: 0.58). In this study, Crs at the applied PEEP was significantly correlated with normally aerated lung volume and tissue on CT. Moreover, recruitability indicated by the R/I ratio and Crs were significantly associated with the normally aerated lung volume. This research underscores the significance of Crs at the applied PEEP as a bedside-measurable parameter and sheds new light on the link between recruitability and normally aerated lung.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Background: Prone position (PP) and the positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP)-induced lung recruitment maneuver (LRM) are both efficient in improving oxygenation and prognosis in patients with ARDS. The synergistic effect of PP combined with PEEP-induced LRM in patients with ARDS remains unclear. We aim to explore the effects of PP combined with PEEP-induced LRM on prognosis in patients with moderate to severe ARDS and the predicting role of lung recruitablity. Methods: Patients with moderate to severe ARDS were consecutively enrolled. The patients were prospectively assigned to either the intervention (PP with PEEP-induced LRM) or control groups (PP). The clinical outcomes, respiratory mechanics, and electric impedance tomography (EIT) monitoring results for the two groups were compared. Lung recruitablity (recruitment-to-inflation ratio: R/I) was measured during the PEEP-induced LRM procedure and was used for predicting the response to LRM. Results: Fifty-eight patients were included in the final analysis, among which 28 patients (48.2%) received PEEP-induced LRM combined with PP. PEEP-induced LRM enhanced the effect of PP by a significant improvement in oxygenation (∆PaO2/FiO2 75.8 mmHg vs. 4.75 mmHg, p < 0.001) and the compliance of respiratory system (∆Crs, 2 mL/cmH2O vs. -1 mL/cmH2O, p = 0.02) among ARDS patients. Based on the EIT measurement, PP combined with PEEP-induced LRM increased the ventilation distribution mainly in the dorsal region (5.0% vs. 2.0%, p = 0.015). The R/I ratio was measured in 28 subjects. The higher R/I ratio was related to greater oxygenation improvement after LRM (Pearson's r = 0.4; p = 0.034). Conclusions: In patients with moderate to severe ARDS, PEEP-induced LRM combined with PP can improve oxygenation and dorsal ventilation distribution. R/I can be useful to predict responses to LRM.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Various Positive End-Expiratory Pressure (PEEP) titration strategies have been proposed to optimize ventilation in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). We aimed to compare PEEP titration strategies based on electrical impedance tomography (EIT) to methods derived from respiratory system mechanics with or without esophageal pressure measurements, in terms of PEEP levels and association with recruitability. METHODS: Nineteen patients with ARDS were enrolled. Recruitability was assessed by the estimated Recruitment-to-Inflation ratio (R/Iest) between PEEP 15 and 5 cmH2O. Then, a decremental PEEP trial from PEEP 20 to 5 cmH2O was performed. PEEP levels determined by the following strategies were studied: (1) plateau pressure 28-30 cmH2O (Express), (2) minimal positive expiratory transpulmonary pressure (Positive PLe), (3) center of ventilation closest to 0.5 (CoV) and (4) intersection of the EIT-based overdistension and lung collapse curves (Crossing Point). In addition, the PEEP levels determined by the Crossing Point strategy were assessed using different PEEP ranges during the decremental PEEP trial. RESULTS: Express and CoV strategies led to higher PEEP levels than the Positive PLe and Crossing Point ones (17 [14-17], 20 [17-20], 8 [5-11], 10 [8-11] respectively, p < 0.001). For each strategy, there was no significant association between the optimal PEEP level and R/Iest (Crossing Point: r2 = 0.073, p = 0.263; CoV: r2 < 0.001, p = 0.941; Express: r2 < 0.001, p = 0.920; Positive PLe: r2 = 0.037, p = 0.461). The PEEP level obtained with the Crossing Point strategy was impacted by the PEEP range used during the decremental PEEP trial. CONCLUSIONS: CoV and Express strategies led to higher PEEP levels than the Crossing Point and Positive PLe strategies. Optimal PEEP levels proposed by these four methods were not associated with recruitability. Recruitability should be specifically assessed in ARDS patients to optimize PEEP titration.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: In ARDS, the PEEP level associated with the best respiratory system compliance is often selected; however, intra-tidal recruitment can increase compliance, falsely suggesting improvement in baseline mechanics. Tidal lung hysteresis increases with intra-tidal recruitment and can help interpreting changes in compliance. This study aims to assess tidal recruitment in ARDS patients and to test a combined approach, based on tidal hysteresis and compliance, to interpret decremental PEEP trials. METHODS: A decremental PEEP trial was performed in 38 COVID-19 moderate to severe ARDS patients. At each step, we performed a low-flow inflation-deflation manoeuvre between PEEP and a constant plateau pressure, to measure tidal hysteresis and compliance. RESULTS: According to changes of tidal hysteresis, three typical patterns were observed: 10 (26%) patients showed consistently high tidal-recruitment, 12 (32%) consistently low tidal-recruitment and 16 (42%) displayed a biphasic pattern moving from low to high tidal-recruitment below a certain PEEP. Compliance increased after 82% of PEEP step decreases and this was associated to a large increase of tidal hysteresis in 44% of cases. Agreement between best compliance and combined approaches was accordingly poor (K = 0.024). The combined approach suggested to increase PEEP in high tidal-recruiters, mainly to keep PEEP constant in biphasic pattern and to decrease PEEP in low tidal-recruiters. PEEP based on the combined approach was associated with lower tidal hysteresis (92.7 ± 20.9 vs. 204.7 ± 110.0 mL; p < 0.001) and lower dissipated energy per breath (0.1 ± 0.1 vs. 0.4 ± 0.2 J; p < 0.001) compared to the best compliance approach. Tidal hysteresis ≥ 100 mL was highly predictive of tidal recruitment at next PEEP step reduction (AUC 0.97; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Assessment of tidal hysteresis improves the interpretation of decremental PEEP trials and may help limiting tidal recruitment and energy dissipated into the respiratory system during mechanical ventilation of ARDS patients.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia can lead to acute hypoxemic respiratory failure. When mechanical ventilation is needed, almost all patients with COVID-19 pneumonia meet the criteria for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). The question of the specificities of COVID-19-associated ARDS compared to other causes of ARDS is of utmost importance, as it may justify changes in ventilatory strategies. This review aims to describe the pathophysiology of COVID-19-associated ARDS and discusses whether specific ventilatory strategies are required in these patients.

RESUMEN

Determination of optimum PEEP levels remains an elusive goal. One factor is the recruitability of the lung, yet this is another difficult determination. Recently, a simple bedside technique, called the recruitment-to-inflation ratio, has been described and validated by comparison to the dual pressure-volume curve method. We describe the prior research and concepts of lung mechanics leading up to this metric and develop some background mathematics that help clinicians understand its meaning.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Rationale: Defining lung recruitability is needed for safe positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) selection in mechanically ventilated patients. However, there is no simple bedside method including both assessment of recruitability and risks of overdistension as well as personalized PEEP titration. Objectives: To describe the range of recruitability using electrical impedance tomography (EIT), effects of PEEP on recruitability, respiratory mechanics and gas exchange, and a method to select optimal EIT-based PEEP. Methods: This is the analysis of patients with coronavirus disease (COVID-19) from an ongoing multicenter prospective physiological study including patients with moderate-severe acute respiratory distress syndrome of different causes. EIT, ventilator data, hemodynamics, and arterial blood gases were obtained during PEEP titration maneuvers. EIT-based optimal PEEP was defined as the crossing point of the overdistension and collapse curves during a decremental PEEP trial. Recruitability was defined as the amount of modifiable collapse when increasing PEEP from 6 to 24 cm H2O (ΔCollapse24-6). Patients were classified as low, medium, or high recruiters on the basis of tertiles of ΔCollapse24-6. Measurements and Main Results: In 108 patients with COVID-19, recruitability varied from 0.3% to 66.9% and was unrelated to acute respiratory distress syndrome severity. Median EIT-based PEEP differed between groups: 10 versus 13.5 versus 15.5 cm H2O for low versus medium versus high recruitability (P < 0.05). This approach assigned a different PEEP level from the highest compliance approach in 81% of patients. The protocol was well tolerated; in four patients, the PEEP level did not reach 24 cm H2O because of hemodynamic instability. Conclusions: Recruitability varies widely among patients with COVID-19. EIT allows personalizing PEEP setting as a compromise between recruitability and overdistension. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04460859).

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Heterogeneity is an inherent nature of ARDS. Recruitment-to-inflation ratio has been developed to identify the patients who has lung recruitablity. This technique might be useful to identify the patients that match specific interventions, such as higher positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) or prone position or both. We aimed to evaluate the physiological effects of PEEP and body position on lung mechanics and regional lung inflation in COVID-19-associated ARDS and to propose the optimal ventilatory strategy based on recruitment-to-inflation ratio. METHODS: Patients with COVID-19-associated ARDS were consecutively enrolled. Lung recruitablity (recruitment-to-inflation ratio) and regional lung inflation (electrical impedance tomography [EIT]) were measured with a combination of body position (supine or prone) and PEEP (low 5 cmH2O or high 15 cmH2O). The utility of recruitment-to-inflation ratio to predict responses to PEEP were examined with EIT. RESULTS: Forty-three patients were included. Recruitment-to-inflation ratio was 0.68 (IQR 0.52-0.84), separating high recruiter versus low recruiter. Oxygenation was the same between two groups. In high recruiter, a combination of high PEEP with prone position achieved the highest oxygenation and less dependent silent spaces in EIT (vs. low PEEP in both positions) without increasing non-dependent silent spaces in EIT. In low recruiter, low PEEP in prone position resulted in better oxygenation (vs. both PEEPs in supine position), less dependent silent spaces (vs. low PEEP in supine position) and less non-dependent silent spaces (vs. high PEEP in both positions). Recruitment-to-inflation ratio was positively correlated with the improvement in oxygenation and respiratory system compliance, the decrease in dependent silent spaces, and was inversely correlated with the increase in non-dependent silent spaces, when applying high PEEP. CONCLUSIONS: Recruitment-to-inflation ratio may be useful to personalize PEEP in COVID-19-associated ARDS. Higher PEEP in prone position and lower PEEP in prone position decreased the amount of dependent silent spaces (suggesting lung collapse) without increasing the amount of non-dependent silent spaces (suggesting overinflation) in high recruiter and in low recruiter, respectively.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The ventilatory management of COVID-ARDS is controversial, especially with regard to the different subtypes and associated PEEP titration. A higher PEEP may be beneficial only in patients with potential for lung recruitment. The assessment of lung recruitment may be guided by lung imaging, such as electric impedance tomography or recruitment computed tomography, but is complex and not established in routine clinical practice. Therefore, bedside identification of recruitable ARDS phenotypes can aid in PEEP titration in clinical settings. METHODS: In this retrospective consecutive cohort study in 40 patients with moderate-to-severe COVID-ARDS, we assessed lung recruitment using the recruitment-to-inflation ratio (R/I) in moderate-to-severe COVID-ARDS. Evidence of recruitment (R/I ≥ 0.5) was compared between clinical and computed tomography data. RESULTS: Of the included patients, 28 (70%) were classified as recruiters by the R/I. Lung recruitment was associated with higher compliance and was not associated with a consolidated lung pattern assessed using CT. Even in the tertile of patients with the highest compliance (37-70 ml/mbar), eight (73%) patients were classified as recruitable. Patients classified as recruitable presented a lower reticular lung pattern (2% vs. 6%, p = 0.032). CONCLUSIONS: Prediction of lung recruitment is difficult based on routine clinical data but may be improved by assessment of radiographic lung patterns. A bedside assessment of recruitment is necessary to guide clinical care. Even a high compliance may not rule out the potential for lung recruitment.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Data on the lung respiratory mechanics and gas exchange in the time course of COVID-19-associated respiratory failure is limited. This study aimed to explore respiratory mechanics and gas exchange, the lung recruitability and risk of overdistension during the time course of mechanical ventilation. METHODS: This was a prospective observational study in critically ill mechanically ventilated patients (n = 116) with COVID-19 admitted into Intensive Care Units of Sechenov University. The primary endpoints were: «optimum¼ positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) level balanced between the lowest driving pressure and the highest SpO2 and number of patients with recruitable lung on Days 1 and 7 of mechanical ventilation. We measured driving pressure at different levels of PEEP (14, 12, 10 and 8 cmH2O) with preset tidal volume, and with the increase of tidal volume by 100 ml and 200 ml at preset PEEP level, and calculated static respiratory system compliance (CRS), PaO2/FiO2, alveolar dead space and ventilatory ratio on Days 1, 3, 5, 7, 10, 14 and 21. RESULTS: The «optimum¼ PEEP levels on Day 1 were 11.0 (10.0-12.8) cmH2O and 10.0 (9.0-12.0) cmH2O on Day 7. Positive response to recruitment was observed on Day 1 in 27.6% and on Day 7 in 9.2% of patients. PEEP increase from 10 to 14 cmH2O and VT increase by 100 and 200 ml led to a significant decrease in CRS from Day 1 to Day 14 (p < 0.05). Ventilatory ratio was 2.2 (1.7-2,7) in non-survivors and in 1.9 (1.6-2.6) survivors on Day 1 and decreased on Day 7 in survivors only (p < 0.01). PaO2/FiO2 was 105.5 (76.2-141.7) mmHg in non-survivors on Day 1 and 136.6 (106.7-160.8) in survivors (p = 0.002). In survivors, PaO2/FiO2 rose on Day 3 (p = 0.008) and then between Days 7 and 10 (p = 0.046). CONCLUSION: Lung recruitability was low in COVID-19 and decreased during the course of the disease, but lung overdistension occurred at «intermediate¼ PEEP and VT levels. In survivors gas exchange improvements after Day 7 mismatched CRS. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04445961 . Registered 24 June 2020-Retrospectively registered.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: In the context of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), the response to lung recruitment maneuvers (LRMs) varies considerably from one patient to another and so is difficult to predict. The aim of the study was to determine whether or not the recruitment-to-inflation (R/I) ratio could differentiate between patients according to the change in lung mechanics during the LRM. METHODS: We evaluated the changes in gas exchange and respiratory mechanics induced by a stepwise LRM at a constant driving pressure of 15 cmH2O during pressure-controlled ventilation. We assessed lung recruitability by measuring the R/I ratio. Patients were dichotomized with regard to the median R/I ratio. RESULTS: We included 30 patients with moderate-to-severe ARDS and a median [interquartile range] R/I ratio of 0.62 [0.42-0.83]. After the LRM, patients with high recruitability (R/I ratio ≥ 0.62) presented an improvement in the PaO2/FiO2 ratio, due to significant increase in respiratory system compliance (33 [27-42] vs. 42 [35-60] mL/cmH2O; p < 0.001). In low recruitability patients (R/I < 0.62), the increase in PaO2/FiO2 ratio was associated with a significant decrease in pulse pressure as a surrogate of cardiac output (70 [55-85] vs. 50 [51-67] mmHg; p = 0.01) but not with a significant change in respiratory system compliance (33 [24-47] vs. 35 [25-47] mL/cmH2O; p = 0.74). CONCLUSION: After the LRM, patients with high recruitability presented a significant increase in respiratory system compliance (indicating a gain in ventilated area), while those with low recruitability presented a decrease in pulse pressure suggesting a drop in cardiac output and therefore in intrapulmonary shunt.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been frequently complicated by severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) with prolonged invasive ventilation. While respiratory system compliance and lung recruitability have been described within the first days after ICU admission, data about their longitudinal changes are still limited. Therefore, we conducted this study to assess the evolution of respiratory system compliance and lung recruitability in patients with COVID-19-related ARDS. Method: We conducted a prospective single-center study in patients admitted for COVID-19-related ARDS during the first wave of the pandemic, from March 16, 2020 to April 10, 2020. Respiratory system compliance was calculated daily at clinical positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) during passive breathing. The potential for lung recruitment was assessed by measuring the volume derecruited between PEEP 15 cmH2O and 5 cmH2O, and using the calculation of the recruitment-to-inflation ratio (R/I ratio). Recruitable lung was considered when the R/I ratio was at least 0.5. The primary outcome was the evolution of respiratory mechanics over time. The secondary outcome was the evolution of lung recruitability over time. Results: Thirty-two patients were included in this study. The respiratory mechanics were assessed 222 times (7 ± 5 times per patient). Respiratory system compliance at clinical PEEP was 29.1 mL/cmH2O (interquartile range [IQR]: 24.1-33.9 mL/cmH2O) and decreased significantly over time (P <0.0001). Lung recruitability was assessed in 22 out of the 32 patients (60 assessments). The median volume derecruited between PEEP 15 cmH2O and 5 cmH2O was 246.8 mL (IQR: 180.8-352.2 mL) and the median R/I ratio was 0.56 (IQR: 0.39-0.73). Neither changed significantly over time. The proportion of patients with recruitable lung was 50.0% (6/12) within the first 3 days after intubation, 69.2% (9/13) between day 4 and day 7, and 66.7% (8/12) after day 7 (P=0.7934). Conclusions: In our cohort, respiratory system compliance was low and decreased over time. The potential for lung recruitment was high and persisted despite prolonged mechanical ventilation, suggesting that maintaining high PEEP levels in the later course of COVID-19 could be adequate.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: A large proportion of patients with a SARS-Cov-2-associated respiratory failure develop an acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). It has been recently suggested that SARS-Cov-2-associated ARDS may differ from usual non-SARS-Cov-2-associated ARDS by higher respiratory system compliance (CRS), lower potential for recruitment with positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) contrasting with severe shunt fraction. The purpose of the study was to systematically assess respiratory mechanics and recruitability in SARS-Cov-2-associated ARDS. METHODS: Gas exchanges, CRS and hemodynamics were assessed at 2 levels of PEEP (15 cmH2O and 5 cmH2O) within 36 h (day1) and from 4 to 6 days (day 5) after intubation. The recruited volume was computed as the difference between the volume expired from PEEP 15 to 5 cmH2O and the volume predicted by compliance at PEEP 5 cmH2O (or above airway opening pressure). The recruitment-to-inflation (R/I) ratio (i.e. the ratio between the recruited lung compliance and CRS at PEEP 5 cmH2O) was used to assess lung recruitability. A R/I ratio value higher than or equal to 0.5 was used to define highly recruitable patients. RESULTS: The R/I ratio was calculated in 25 of the 26 enrolled patients at day 1 and in 15 patients at day 5. At day 1, 16 (64%) were considered as highly recruitable (R/I ratio median [interquartile range] 0.7 [0.55-0.94]) and 9 (36%) were considered as poorly recruitable (R/I ratio 0.41 [0.31-0.48]). The PaO2/FiO2 ratio at PEEP 15 cmH2O was higher compared to PEEP 5 cmH2O only in highly recruitable patients (173 [139-236] vs 135 [89-167] mmHg; p < 0.01). Neither PaO2/FiO2 or CRS measured at PEEP 15 cmH2O or at PEEP 5 cmH2O nor changes in PaO2/FiO2 or CRS in response to PEEP changes allowed to identify highly or poorly recruitable patients. CONCLUSION: In this series of 25 patients with SARS-Cov-2 associated ARDS, 64% were considered as highly recruitable and only 36% as poorly recruitable based on the R/I ratio performed on the day of intubation. This observation suggests that a systematic R/I ratio assessment may help to guide initial PEEP titration to limit harmful effect of unnecessary high PEEP in the context of Covid-19 crisis.

RESUMEN

Background: Patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) may develop severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). The aim of the study was to explore the lung recruitability, individualized positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP), and prone position in COVID-19-associated severe ARDS. Methods: Twenty patients who met the inclusion criteria were studied retrospectively (PaO2/FiO2 68.0 ± 10.3 mmHg). The patients were ventilated under volume-controlled mode with tidal volume of 6 mL/kg predicted body weight. The lung recruitability was assessed via the improvement of PaO2, PaCO2, and static respiratory system compliance (Cstat) from low to high PEEP (5-15 cmH2O). Patients were considered recruitable if two out of three parameters improved. Subsequently, PEEP was titrated according to the best Cstat. The patients were turned to prone position for further 18-20 h. Results: For recruitability assessment, average value of PaO2 was slightly improved at PEEP 15 cmH2O (68.0 ± 10.3 vs. 69.7 ± 7.9 mmHg, baseline vs. PEEP 15 cmH2O; p = 0.31). However, both PaCO2 and Cstat worsened (PaCO2: 72.5 ± 7.1 vs. 75.1 ± 9.0 mmHg; p < 0.01. Cstat: 17.5 ± 3.5 vs. 16.6 ± 3.9 ml/cmH2O; p = 0.05). Only four patients (20%) were considered lung recruitable. Individually titrated PEEP was higher than the baseline PEEP (8.0 ± 2.1 cmH2O vs. 5 cmH2O, p < 0.001). After 18-20 h of prone positioning, investigated parameters were significantly improved compared to the baseline (PaO2: 82.4 ± 15.5 mmHg. PaCO2: 67.2 ± 6.4 mmHg. Cstat: 20.6 ± 4.4 ml/cmH2O. All p < 0.001 vs. baseline). Conclusions: Lung recruitability was very low in COVID-19-associated severe ARDS. Individually titrated PEEP and prone positioning might improve lung mechanics and blood gasses.

RESUMEN

Background: Laparoscopic surgery with pneumoperitoneum increases respiratory system elastance due to the augmented intra-abdominal pressure. We aim to evaluate to which extent positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) is able to counteract abdominal hypertension preventing progressive lung collapse and how rib cage elastance influences PEEP effect. Methods: Forty-four Wistar rats were mechanically ventilated and randomly assigned into three groups: control (CTRL), pneumoperitoneum (PPT) and pneumoperitoneum with restricted rib cage (PPT-RC). A pressure-volume (PV) curve followed by a recruitment maneuver and a decremental PEEP trial were performed in all groups. Thereafter, animals were ventilated using PEEP of 3 and 8 cmH2O divided into two subgroups used to evaluate respiratory mechanics or computed tomography (CT) images. In 26 rats, we compared respiratory system elastance (Ers) at the two PEEP levels. In 18 animals, CT images were acquired to calculate total lung volume (TLV), total volume and air volume in six anatomically delimited regions of interest (three along the cephalo-caudal and three along the ventro-dorsal axes). Results: PEEP of minimal Ers was similar in CTRL and PPT groups (3.8 ± 0.45 and 3.5 ± 3.89 cmH2O, respectively) and differed from PPT-RC group (9.8 ± 0.63 cmH2O). Chest restriction determined a right- and downward shift of the PV curve, increased Ers and diminished TLV and lung aeration. Increasing PEEP augmented TLV in CTRL group (11.8 ± 1.3 to 13.6 ± 2 ml, p < 0.05), and relative air content in the apex of PPT group (3.5 ± 1.4 to 4.6 ± 1.4% TLV, p < 0.03) and in the middle zones in PPT-RC group (21.4 ± 1.9 to 25.3 ± 2.1% TLV cephalo-caudally and 18.1 ± 4.3 to 22.0 ± 3.3% TLV ventro-dorsally, p < 0.005). Conclusion: Regional lung recruitment potential during pneumoperitoneum depends on rib cage elastance, reinforcing the concept of PEEP individualization according to the patient's condition.