MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Comparison of hyperventilation and inhaled nitric oxide for pulmonary hypertension after repair of congenital heart disease

2000· article· en· W2005348889 on OpenAlexaff
Kevin Morris, Maurice Beghetti, Andy Petros, Ian Adatia, Desmond Bohn

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Care Medicine · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal function and acid-base balance
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHyperventilationPulmonary hypertensionVascular resistancePulmonary arteryHemodynamicsCardiologyAnesthesiaInternal medicineCardiac outputHeart disease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Pulmonary hypertension is associated with congenital heart lesions with increased pulmonary blood flow. Acute increases in pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR) occur in the postoperative period after repair of these defects. These increases in PVR can be ablated by inducing an alkalosis with hyperventilation (HV) or bicarbonate therapy. Studies have shown that these patients also respond to inhaled nitric oxide (iNO), but uncertainty exists over the relative merits and undesirable effects of HV and iNO. HYPOTHESIS: Alkalosis and iNO are equally effective in reducing PVR and pulmonary artery pressure (PAP) in children with pulmonary hypertension after open heart surgery. SETTING: Critical care unit of a tertiary care pediatric hospital. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, crossover design. PATIENTS: Twelve children with a mean PAP > 25 mm Hg at normal pH after biventricular repair of congenital heart disease. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were assigned to receive iNO or HV (pH > 7.5) in random order, and the effect on hemodynamics was measured. Each treatment was administered for 30 mins with a 30-min washout period between treatments. Finally, both treatments were administered together to look for a possible additive effect. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Cardiac output and derived hemodynamic parameters using the dye dilution technique. Hyperventilation, achieved by an increase in ventilator rate without a change in mean airway pressure, decreased Pa(CO2) from a mean (SD) of 43.7+/-5.3 to 32.3+/-5.4 mm Hg and increased pH from 7.40+/-0.04 to 7.50+/-0.03. This significantly altered both pulmonary and systemic hemodynamics with a reduction in PAP, PVR, central venous pressure, and cardiac output and an increase in systemic vascular resistance. In comparison, iNO selectively reduced PAP and PVR only. The reduction in PVR was comparable between treatments, although addition of iNO to HV resulted in a small additional reduction in PVR. An additional decrease in PAP was seen when HV was added to iNO, attributable to a reduction in cardiac output rather than a further decrease in PVR. CONCLUSIONS: Inhaled NO and HV are both effective at lowering PAP and PVR in children with pulmonary hypertension after repair of congenital heart disease. The selective action of iNO on the pulmonary circulation offers advantages over HV because a decrease in cardiac output and an increase in SVR are undesirable in the postoperative period.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.300 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
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

Citations108
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical Care MedicineSame topicRenal function and acid-base balanceFrench-language works237,207