• Olinto Linares-Perdomo, Thomas D East, Roy Brower, and Alan H Morris.
• Chest. 2015 Jul 1;148(1):73-8.

BackgroundRecent recommendations for lung protective mechanical ventilation include a tidal volume target of 6 mL/kg predicted body weight (PBW). Different PBW equations might introduce important differences in tidal volumes delivered to research subjects and patients.MethodsPBW equations use height, age, and sex as input variables. We compared National Institutes of Health (NIH) ARDS Network (ARDSNet), actuarial table (ACTUARIAL), and Stewart (STEWART) PBW equations used in clinical trials, across physiologic ranges for age and height. We used three-dimensional and two-dimensional surface analysis to compare these PBW equations. We then used age and height from actual clinical trial subjects to quantify PBW equation differences.ResultsSignificant potential differences existed between these PBW predictions. The ACTUARIAL and ARDSNet surfaces for women were the only surfaces that intersected and produced both positive and negative differences. Mathematical differences between PBW equations at limits of height and age exceeded 30% in women and 24% in men for ACTUARIAL vs ARDSNet and about 25% for women and 15% for men for STEWART vs ARDSNet. The largest mathematical differences were present in older, shorter subjects, especially women. Actual differences for clinical trial subjects were as high as 15% for men and 24% for women.ConclusionsSignificant differences between PBW equations for both men and women could be important sources of interstudy variation. Studies should adopt a standard PBW equation. We recommend using the NIH National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute ARDS Network PBW equation because it is associated with the clinical trial that identified 6 mL/kg PBW as an appropriate target.

23 keywords...

hide…