This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Topic Collections  • Pulmonary Diseases, Other  • Critical Care/ Intensive Care Medicine  • Adult Critical Care  • Alert me on articles by topic

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

To the Editor: I believe that the design of the Lung Open Ventilator Study by Dr Meade and colleagues¹ made an error by adjusting PEEP according to FIO ₂, leading to overdistention of alveoli as evidenced by lower static compliance (tidal volume / [plateau pressure – end-expiratory pressure]) in the high PEEP group than in the lower PEEP group.² The mean levels of compliance in the high and low PEEP groups were 0.41 and 0.42 mL/kg/cm H₂O on day 3 and 0.37 and 0.41 mL/kg/cm H₂O on day 7, respectively. Despite a similar protocol, the same phenomenon was not observed in the ALVEOLI study,³ possibly due to the difference in patient population. The protocol change in the middle of the study allowing higher PEEP levels in the Lung Open Ventilator Study might have negatively affected the study results.

The results of the Express study by Dr Mercat and colleagues⁴ could also . . . [Full Text of this Article]

Yuji Oba, MD
obay@health.missouri.edu
Pulmonary, Critical Care, and Environmental Medicine
University of Missouri–Columbia