Monitoring Lung Aeration during Respiratory Support in Preterm Infants at Birth
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: If infants fail to initiate spontaneous breathing, resuscitation guidelines recommend respiratory support with positive pressure ventilation (PPV). The purpose of PPV is to establish functional residual capacity and deliver an adequate tidal volume (VT) to achieve gas exchange. OBJECTIVE: The aim of our pilot study was to measure changes in exhaled carbon dioxide (ECO2), VT, and rate of carbon dioxide elimination (VCO2) to assess lung aeration in preterm infants requiring respiratory support immediately after birth. METHOD: A prospective observational study was performed between March and July 2013. Infants born at <37 weeks gestational age who received continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) or PPV immediately after birth had VT delivery and ECO2 continuously recorded using a sensor attached to the facemask. RESULTS: Fifty-one preterm infants (mean (SD) gestational age 29 (3) weeks and birth weight 1425 (592 g)) receiving respiratory support in the delivery room were included. Infants in the CPAP group (n = 31) had higher ECO2 values during the first 10 min after birth compared to infants receiving PPV (n = 20) (ranging between 18-30 vs. 13-18 mmHg, p<0.05, respectively). At 10 min no significant difference in ECO2 values was observed. VT was lower in the CPAP group compared to the PPV group over the first 10 min ranging between 5.2-6.6 vs. and 7.2-11.3 mL/kg (p<0.05), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Immediately after birth, spontaneously breathing preterm infants supported via CPAP achieved better lung aeration compared to infants requiring PPV. PPV guided by VT and ECO2 potentially optimize lung aeration without excessive VT administered.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".