Proposed Section Structure
This topic is best organized around clinical mechanism, bedside physiology, study design, core results, and implications for ventilator management. A suitable structure is: Highlights; Clinical Background; Study Design and Physiologic Measurements; Key Results; Mechanistic Interpretation; Clinical Implications; Strengths and Limitations; Conclusion; Funding and Trial Information; References.
Highlights
Electrical impedance tomography identified substantial tidal recruitment/derecruitment in lightly sedated, spontaneously breathing ARDS patients receiving pressure support ventilation.
Compared with a low PEEP/FiO2 table strategy, EIT-selected PEEP reduced tidal recruitment/derecruitment, with median values falling from 21.9% to 11.3%.
Across both PEEP conditions, greater tidal recruitment/derecruitment was associated with lower PEEP, more negative end-expiratory transpulmonary pressure, more lung collapse, lower compliance, higher inspiratory drive and effort, higher dynamic transpulmonary driving pressure, and non-focal radiographic morphology.
In multivariable analysis, the strongest independent determinants were more negative end-expiratory transpulmonary pressure, greater collapse, and a non-focal ARDS pattern.
Clinical Background
Recruitment and derecruitment of unstable lung units during each breath is a recognized mechanism of ventilator-associated and patient self-inflicted lung injury in acute respiratory distress syndrome. This process, often called tidal recruitment/derecruitment, exposes injured tissue to repetitive opening and closing, amplifying local stress, inflammation, and edema. The concept is well established in passive mechanical ventilation, but it is more difficult to characterize at the bedside in patients who are awake or lightly sedated and still generating spontaneous inspiratory effort.
This distinction matters clinically. Pressure support ventilation is frequently used in ARDS once clinicians aim to reduce sedation, preserve diaphragmatic function, and promote comfort. Yet spontaneous breathing is physiologically double-edged. It may improve ventilation-perfusion matching and reduce diaphragm atrophy, but if inspiratory effort is excessive, it can worsen regional pressure gradients, increase pendelluft, deepen dependent lung collapse, and intensify cyclic recruitment. Therefore, identifying which spontaneously breathing ARDS patients remain exposed to harmful tidal recruitment is a practical unmet need.
Electrical impedance tomography offers a plausible bedside solution. By measuring regional impedance changes through an electrode belt placed around the thorax, EIT can estimate regional ventilation, collapse, overdistension, and dynamic inhomogeneity in real time. It has been increasingly used to individualize PEEP and to visualize regional mechanics that conventional airway pressure and gas exchange measurements cannot detect. The current study addresses a clinically relevant question: in ARDS patients receiving pressure support ventilation, what bedside physiological factors are associated with tidal recruitment/derecruitment measured by EIT?
Study Design and Physiologic Assessment
This report is a secondary analysis of a previous physiological study in lightly sedated ARDS patients ventilated on pressure support. Patients underwent evaluation at two PEEP settings: one selected by EIT and one chosen according to a low PEEP/FiO2 table strategy. The analysis focused on determinants of tidal recruitment/derecruitment rather than on a clinical outcome such as mortality or ventilator-free days.
Of the 30 patients in the original cohort, one was excluded because end-expiratory lung impedance was unstable, leaving 29 patients for analysis. This is an important methodological detail because stable end-expiratory impedance is essential when interpreting cyclic recruitment from EIT signals.
The two PEEP conditions differed modestly but meaningfully. Median PEEP was 10.0 cmH2O with the EIT-guided approach and 8.0 cmH2O with the table-based approach. Detailed physiologic measurements included respiratory mechanics, inspiratory drive and effort, regional mechanics, lung collapse, pendelluft, dynamic transpulmonary pressure behavior, and tidal recruitment/derecruitment assessed by EIT.
The study is best viewed as a mechanistic bedside physiology investigation. Its value lies in clarifying which signals may help clinicians suspect injurious cyclic opening and closing during assisted ventilation, and whether a more individualized PEEP strategy can attenuate that process.
Key Results
Magnitude of tidal recruitment/derecruitment
Overall tidal recruitment/derecruitment was not trivial. Across the cohort, median tidal recruitment/derecruitment was 14.3% with an interquartile range of 9.0% to 33.0%. This finding alone is clinically notable, because it suggests that many spontaneously breathing ARDS patients on pressure support continue to experience substantial cyclical instability, even outside fully controlled ventilation.
EIT-guided PEEP reduced cyclic instability
Tidal recruitment/derecruitment was significantly lower with EIT-selected PEEP than with the low PEEP/FiO2 table approach: 11.3% versus 21.9%, with P = .008. Although this was not a patient-centered outcome study, the reduction is physiologically compelling. It implies that individualized PEEP selected using regional ventilation information may better stabilize recruitable lung units during assisted ventilation than a generalized table-based strategy.
The reduction in tidal recruitment/derecruitment with EIT-guided PEEP correlated with reductions in lung collapse and pendelluft. The correlation with collapse was strong, with rho = 0.72 and P < .001. The correlation with pendelluft was moderate, with rho = 0.57 and P = .002. These relationships support a coherent mechanistic picture: when PEEP reduces dependent collapse and dampens intrapulmonary gas shifts driven by uneven inspiratory effort, cyclic opening and closing also decreases.
Determinants identified in mixed-effects models
When data from both randomized PEEP settings were analyzed together, several variables were associated with greater tidal recruitment/derecruitment. Lower PEEP was strongly associated with higher recruitment/derecruitment, with P < .001. More negative end-expiratory transpulmonary pressure was also strongly associated, again with P < .001. This is likely one of the most clinically meaningful findings, because it links the regional EIT signal to a familiar physiological construct: whether distending pressure at end-expiration is sufficient to keep unstable units open.
Greater collapse was another strong determinant, with P < .001, while lower respiratory system compliance was associated with higher recruitment/derecruitment with P = .002. Together, these findings indicate that a smaller, more collapsible, less compliant functional lung is more vulnerable to tidal instability during assisted ventilation.
Breathing pattern and respiratory muscle output were also relevant. Higher respiratory drive was associated with greater recruitment/derecruitment, with P = .001. Higher inspiratory effort was associated with greater recruitment/derecruitment, with P = .009. Higher dynamic driving transpulmonary pressure was similarly associated, with P = .009. These observations reinforce concern that vigorous spontaneous effort can worsen regional lung injury risk even when patients are receiving partial ventilatory support.
Radiographic or morphologic phenotype also mattered. Patients with non-focal infiltrates had higher tidal recruitment/derecruitment than those with focal disease, with P = .005. That result is clinically plausible because diffuse or non-focal ARDS typically involves broader dependent instability and may be more recruitable, but also more prone to cyclic opening and closing when PEEP is insufficient.
Independent predictors in multivariable analysis
In multivariable analysis, three factors remained independently associated with tidal recruitment/derecruitment: more negative end-expiratory transpulmonary pressure, greater lung collapse, and non-focal infiltrate pattern. This is an important refinement of the univariable and mixed-model associations. It suggests that while inspiratory drive, effort, compliance, and dynamic transpulmonary swings are clearly linked to tidal instability, the core structural and pressure-related determinants are the pressure environment at end-expiration, the amount of residual collapse, and the underlying morphology of ARDS.
Mechanistic Interpretation
The study’s findings align with current concepts of lung-protective assisted ventilation. End-expiratory transpulmonary pressure is a physiologic marker of whether alveoli are exposed to a sufficient distending pressure to resist collapse. When it becomes more negative, dependent regions are more likely to close at end-expiration and reopen during the next inspiratory effort. EIT then captures this as tidal recruitment/derecruitment.
The link with collapse is expected but still clinically useful. Collapse is not merely a static imaging descriptor; it is the substrate from which cyclic opening can emerge. A collapsed but recruitable unit may repeatedly open with each inspiratory effort if end-expiratory stabilization is inadequate. In that sense, collapse and tidal recruitment are related but not identical phenomena, and the study shows that EIT can help distinguish both.
The relationship with respiratory drive and effort deserves particular attention. In spontaneously breathing ARDS, negative pleural pressure swings can be substantial. These swings may improve aeration in some areas while paradoxically increasing regional stress in others, especially dependent lung zones. Pendelluft, the redistribution of gas from nondependent to dependent regions before ventilator flow begins or during early inspiration, is one expression of this heterogeneity. The observed correlation between reductions in pendelluft and reductions in recruitment/derecruitment supports the idea that effort-related inhomogeneity is an important co-driver of lung injury risk.
The morphologic finding is also plausible. Non-focal ARDS tends to behave differently from focal lobar or patchy collapse. It often exhibits more diffuse loss of aeration and a larger volume of unstable tissue. In such lungs, insufficient PEEP is more likely to permit widespread cyclic instability, whereas individualized PEEP may stabilize a larger fraction of recruitable units.
Clinical Implications
Several bedside messages emerge from this study. First, pressure support ventilation does not eliminate the risk of tidal recruitment/derecruitment. Clinicians should not assume that spontaneous breathing is intrinsically protective in ARDS. Second, if a patient demonstrates high inspiratory drive, substantial effort, low compliance, or a non-focal pattern of infiltrates, suspicion for injurious cyclic opening and closing should increase.
Third, the data support the use of individualized PEEP assessment rather than exclusive reliance on generalized PEEP/FiO2 tables in selected patients. The median absolute PEEP difference between strategies was small, yet the reduction in tidal recruitment/derecruitment was significant. This suggests that tailoring PEEP to regional physiology may produce benefits not apparent from oxygenation alone.
Fourth, end-expiratory transpulmonary pressure appears clinically relevant even during assisted ventilation. Where esophageal manometry expertise is available, a more negative end-expiratory transpulmonary pressure may help identify patients at risk of cyclical collapse. Combined with EIT, this could provide a more complete picture of both static and dynamic lung instability.
Finally, the study adds to the broader effort to define lung-protective assisted ventilation. Protection in this setting likely requires attention to both ventilator settings and patient effort. Simply setting a low support pressure may not be enough if inspiratory drive remains excessive and end-expiratory stabilization is inadequate.
Strengths and Limitations
The study has several strengths. It uses advanced bedside physiology to investigate a clinically important mechanism in a population that is common in everyday intensive care practice but less frequently studied than deeply sedated patients. It compares two distinct PEEP selection strategies within the same physiological framework. It also integrates regional EIT signals with classical respiratory mechanics and transpulmonary pressure measurements, allowing a multidimensional interpretation of tidal instability.
Its limitations are equally important. This was a secondary analysis of a relatively small cohort, and the conclusions are therefore physiologic rather than outcome-based. The sample size limits precision and may not capture the full heterogeneity of ARDS. Because the study was not designed to test clinical endpoints, it cannot determine whether reducing EIT-derived tidal recruitment/derecruitment improves mortality, duration of ventilation, or long-term functional outcomes.
Generalizability may also be constrained. The patients were lightly sedated and managed in a setting with substantial expertise in EIT and respiratory physiology. Not all intensive care units can replicate these measurements. In addition, EIT estimates of collapse and recruitment are indirect and depend on signal stability and analytic assumptions. The exclusion of one patient for unstable end-expiratory impedance highlights the technical demands of this approach.
Another limitation is that morphologic classification into focal and non-focal patterns, while clinically useful, can be somewhat operator dependent and may vary with imaging modality. As with many physiologic studies, residual confounding is possible. Variables such as disease stage, fluid balance, chest wall mechanics, and sedation depth may influence both inspiratory effort and lung recruitability.
Conclusion
This study advances bedside understanding of tidal recruitment/derecruitment during assisted ventilation in ARDS. In spontaneously breathing patients on pressure support, cyclic lung instability was common and was reduced by an EIT-guided PEEP strategy compared with a low PEEP/FiO2 table approach. The most important independent determinants were more negative end-expiratory transpulmonary pressure, greater lung collapse, and non-focal ARDS morphology.
Clinically, the findings support a more individualized approach to lung-protective assisted ventilation, integrating PEEP titration, assessment of inspiratory effort, and, where available, regional monitoring such as EIT. The next step is to determine whether identifying and reducing tidal recruitment/derecruitment in this manner improves patient-centered outcomes, and which subgroups are most likely to benefit.
Funding and ClinicalTrials.gov
The abstract provided does not report funding details or a ClinicalTrials.gov registration number. Readers should consult the full American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine article for complete disclosure and registry information, if applicable.
References
1. Perez J, Leali M, Spinelli E, Chiavieri V, Rosà T, Ferrara P, Scaramuzzo G, Antonelli M, Grasselli G, Grieco DL, Spadaro S, Mauri T. Determinants of tidal recruitment/derecruitment assessed by electrical impedance tomography in spontaneously breathing ARDS patients. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine. 2026 May 24. PMID: 42178817.
2. Mauri T, Spinelli E, Scotti E, et al. Potential for lung recruitment and ventilation-perfusion mismatch in patients with the acute respiratory distress syndrome from focal and nonfocal lung morphology. Intensive Care Medicine. 2016;42(1):95-104.
3. Yoshida T, Amato MBP, Grieco DL, et al. Esophageal manometry and regional transpulmonary pressure in lung injury. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine. 2018;197(8):1018-1026.
4. Franchineau G, Bréchot N, Hekimian G, et al. Bedside contribution of electrical impedance tomography to setting positive end-expiratory pressure for acute respiratory distress syndrome. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine. 2020;201(3):324-334.
5. Grieco DL, Menga LS, Raggi V, et al. Patient self-inflicted lung injury: implications for acute hypoxemic respiratory failure and ARDS patients on noninvasive support. Intensive Care Medicine. 2019;45(6):722-724.
6. Writing Group for the Alveolar Recruitment for Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Trial (ART) Investigators, Cavalcanti AB, Suzumura ÉA, et al. Effect of lung recruitment and titrated positive end-expiratory pressure vs low positive end-expiratory pressure on mortality in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2017;318(14):1335-1345.
7. Fan E, Del Sorbo L, Goligher EC, et al. An Official American Thoracic Society/European Society of Intensive Care Medicine/Society of Critical Care Medicine Clinical Practice Guideline: mechanical ventilation in adult patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine. 2017;195(9):1253-1263.
