High-frequency oscillation and exogenous surfactant administration in lung-injured adult sheep
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of high-frequency oscillation on the response to exogenous surfactant in lung-injured adult sheep. DESIGN: A prospective, controlled, in vivo, animal laboratory study. SETTING: Animal research facility of a health sciences university. SUBJECTS: Twenty-eight adult sheep. INTERVENTIONS: Animals were anesthetized and instrumented with a tracheostomy and vascular catheters. Following whole lung saline lavage, animals were randomized to one of four groups: Group S-CMV received surfactant and was ventilated for 4 hrs using a conventional mechanical ventilation strategy, group S-HFOV/CMV received surfactant and was ventilated with a high-frequency oscillation technique for 2 hrs and a conventional mechanical strategy for 2 hrs, group HFOV/CMV underwent the latter ventilatory strategies without receiving surfactant, and group HFOV was ventilated with high-frequency oscillation only for 4 hrs. At the end of the ventilatory period, the distributions of ventilation and surfactant were evaluated in animals that received surfactant. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Animals in the S-CMV group had a significantly greater mean PaO2 value at the end of the experimental period than animals in the S-HFOV/CMV or HFOV/CMV groups. Evaluation of the distribution of ventilation relative to surfactant demonstrated that animals ventilated with high-frequency oscillation followed by conventional mechanical ventilation had a significantly greater disproportionate distribution of ventilation relative to surfactant compared with the CMV-only group. CONCLUSIONS: A period of high-frequency oscillation, as used in this study, immediately following exogenous surfactant administration mitigates the host's response to surfactant when subsequently switched to conventional mechanical ventilation.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".