MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Estimation of left ventricular stroke volume by impedance cardiography: its relation to the aortic reservoir

2013· article· en· W1577438709 on OpenAlexaff
Jiun‐Jr Wang, Gwyneth de Vries, John V. Tyberg

Bibliographic record

VenueExperimental Physiology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHemodynamic Monitoring and Therapy
Canadian institutionsLibin Cardiovascular Institute of AlbertaUniversity of CalgaryDr. Everett Chalmers Regional Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImpedance cardiographyStroke volumeCardiologyHemodynamicsAortic pressureMedicineCardiac outputDiastoleInternal medicineThoracic aortaBlood pressureVentricular pressureEnd-systolic volumeAortaAnesthesiaHeart rate

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

New Findings What is the central question of this study? Thoracic impedance has been used to calculate left ventricular stroke volume for decades, while its theoretical basis remains controversial and the parameters generated have not been related satisfactorily to the haemodynamic events. What is the main finding and what is its importance? We provide mechanistic explanations for the following: (i) why the upstroke of the change in thoracic impedance (Δ Z ) waveform is constantly delayed with respect to that of the central aortic pressure; (ii) why the contour of the Δ Z waveform is ‘blunted’ compared with that of the central aortic pressure; (iii) what mechanism is related to the ‘second bump’ of the Δ Z waveform in early diastole (the ‘O‐wave’); and (iv) the mechanism that is likely to be associated with the decreasing Δ Z waveform in later diastole. Impedance cardiography is a non‐invasive technique used to estimate left ventricular (LV) stroke volume (SV) using the change in thoracic impedance (Δ Z ). It remains controversial, partly because impedance cardiographic parameters have not been successfully related to haemodynamic events. We hypothesized that the change in Δ Z may be proportional to the variation in thoracic (primarily aortic) blood volumes. Nine anaesthetized and ventilated dogs were divided into the following two groups: the ‘aortic volume group’ ( n = 5), in which aortic and IVC (inferior vena caval) dimensions were measured ultrasonically; and the ‘reservoir volume group’, in which aortic and IVC reservoir volumes were calculated using the reservoir–wave model. Measurements were made in control conditions, in the presence of nitroprusside and methoxamine and after volume loading. In both the aortic volume group and the reservoir volume group, the maximal rate of increase in Δ Z [(d Z /d t ) max ] strongly correlated with the maximal rate of change in aortic/reservoir blood volume ( R 2 = 0.85 and 0.95, respectively), which in turn was proportional to the LV SV. The LV and IVC contributions to Δ Z were small in control conditions (∼5 and 1%, respectively), but the LV contribution increased slightly (to 7%) with administration of methoxamine and after volume loading (to 10%). It is concluded that the change in thoracic impedance (Δ Z ) during the cardiac cycle is proportional to the change in aortic reservoir (i.e. Windkessel) volume, which provides a mechanistic explanation for previously demonstrated good correlations with standard measures of cardiac output.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.412
Threshold uncertainty score0.291

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.270 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExperimental PhysiologySame topicHemodynamic Monitoring and TherapyFrench-language works237,207