MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2041607267 · doi:10.1213/ane.0b013e3181ee81b0

Oxygen Delivery During Transtracheal Oxygenation

2010· article· en· W2041607267 on OpenAlexaff
François Lenfant, Laurent Brisard, M. Freysz, C. Lejus

Bibliographic record

VenueAnesthesia & Analgesia · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAirway Management and Intubation Techniques
Canadian institutionsHotel Dieu Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOxygenationAnesthesiaMean airway pressureTidal volumeRespiratory systemRespiratory rateVentilation (architecture)Artificial ventilationAirwayLungArtificial lungRespiratory diseaseInternal medicineHeart rateBlood pressure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The Manujet™ and the ENK Oxygen Flow Modulator™ (ENK) deliver oxygen during transtracheal oxygenation. We sought to describe the ventilation characteristics of these 2 devices. METHODS: The study was conducted in an artificial lung model consisting of a 15-cm ringed tube, simulating the trachea, connected via a flow analyzer and an artificial lung. A 15-gauge transtracheal wire reinforced catheter was used for transtracheal oxygenation. The ENK and Manujet were studied for 3 minutes at respiratory rates of 0, 4, and 12 breaths/min, with and without the artificial lung, in a totally and a partially occluded airway. Statistical analysis was performed using analysis of variance followed by a Fisher exact test; P < 0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: Gas flow and tidal volume were 3 times greater with the Manujet than the ENK (approximately 37 vs 14 L · min(-1) and 700 vs 250 mL, respectively) and were not dependent on the respiratory rate. In the absence of ventilation, the ENK delivered a 0.6 ± 0.1 L · min(-1) constant gas flow. In the totally occluded airway, lung pressures increased to 136 cm H(2)O after 3 insufflations with the Manujet, whereas the ENK, which has a pressure release vent, generated acceptable pressures at a low respiratory rate (4 breaths/min) (peak pressure at 27.7 ± 0.7 and end-expiratory pressure at 18.8 ± 3.8 cm H(2)O). When used at a respiratory rate of 12 breaths/min, the ENK generated higher pressures (peak pressure at 95.9 ± 21.2 and end-expiratory pressure at 51.4 ± 21.4 cm H(2)O). In the partially occluded airway, lung pressures were significantly greater with the Manujet compared with the ENK, and pressures increased with the respiratory rate with both devices. Finally, the gas flow and tidal volume generated by the Manujet varied proportionally with the driving pressure. DISCUSSION: This study confirms the absolute necessity of allowing gas exhalation between 2 insufflations and maintaining low respiratory rates during transtracheal oxygenation. In the case of total airway obstruction, the ENK may be less deleterious because it has a pressure release vent. Using a Manujet at lower driving pressures may decrease the risk of barotrauma and allow the safe use of higher respiratory rates.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.239
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations10
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnesthesia & AnalgesiaSame topicAirway Management and Intubation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207