[Pulse oximetric saturation/fraction of inspired oxygen and partial pressure of oxygen/fraction of inspired oxygen in diagnosing acute respiratory distress syndrome: which is better?]

ABSTRACT

Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) is distinguished by hypoxemia, contributing to heightened morbidity, elevated mortality rates, and substantial healthcare expenses, thereby imposing a significant burden on patients and society. Presently, effective treatments for ARDS are lacking, emphasizing the pivotal role of early diagnosis and timely intervention in its successful management. The partial pressure of oxygen/fraction of inspired oxygen (PaO2/FiO2, P/F) has traditionally served as a crucial metric for assessing patient hypoxemia and disease severity. While relatively accurate, its reliance on advanced technical expertise and specific medical equipment conditions constrains its implementation in areas with underdeveloped medical standards, resulting in missed diagnoses and treatments for ARDS patients. Conversely, the Pulse oximetric saturation/fraction of inspired oxygen (SpO2/FiO2, S/F) has garnered increasing attention owing to its straightforward, non-invasive, and sustainable monitoring attributes. This article seeks to meticulously compare the correlation, accuracy, and clinical feasibility of S/F with P/F in ARDS diagnosis, so as to propose diagnostic indicators for more quickly and accurately assessing the oxygenation status of ARDS patients.