MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Biologically variable ventilation increases arterial oxygenation over that seen with positive end-expiratory pressure alone in a porcine model of acute respiratory distress syndrome

2000· article· en· W2063486696 on OpenAlexaff
W. Alan C. Mutch, Stefan Harms, Gerald R. Lefevre, M. Ruth Graham, Linda Girling, Stephen Kowalski

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Care Medicine · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRespiratory Support and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaSt. Boniface Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMean airway pressureARDSPeak inspiratory pressureAnesthesiaPositive end-expiratory pressureTidal volumeOxygenationRespiratory distressVentilation (architecture)Respiratory systemMechanical ventilationRespiratory physiologyCardiologyInternal medicineLung

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: We compared biologically variable ventilation (BVV) (as previously described) (1) with conventional control mode ventilation (CV) in a model of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) both at 10 cm H2O positive end-expiratory pressure. DESIGN: Randomized, controlled, prospective study. SETTING: University research laboratory. SUBJECTS: Farm-raised 3- to 4-month-old swine. INTERVENTIONS: Oleic acid (OA) was infused at 0.2 mL/kg/hr with FIO2 = 0.5 and 5 cm H2O positive end-expiratory pressure until PaO2 was < or =60 mm Hg; then all animals were placed on an additional 5 cm H2O positive end-expiratory pressure for the next 4 hrs. Animals were assigned randomly to continue CV (n = 9) or to have CV computer controlled to deliver BVV (variable respiratory rate and tidal volume; n = 8). Hemodynamic, expired gas, airway pressure, and volume data were obtained at baseline (before OA), immediately after OA, and then at 60-min intervals for 4 hrs. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: At 4 hrs after OA injury, significantly higher PaO2 (213+/-17 vs. 123+/-47 mm Hg; mean+/-SD), lower shunt fraction (6%+/-1% vs. 18%+/-14%), and lower PaCO2 (50+/-8 vs. 65+/-11 mm Hg) were seen with BVV than with CV. Respiratory system compliance was greater by experiment completion with BVV (0.37+/-0.05 vs. 0.31+/-0.08 mL/cm H2O/kg). The improvements in oxygenation, CO2 elimination, and respiratory mechanics occurred without a significant increase in either mean airway pressure (14.3+/-0.9 vs. 14.9+/-1.1 cm H2O) or mean peak airway pressure (39.3+/-3.5 vs. 44.5+/-7.2 cm H2O) with BVV. The oxygen index increased five-fold with OA injury and decreased to significantly lower levels over time with BVV. CONCLUSIONS: In this model of ARDS, BVV with 10 cm H2O positive end-expiratory pressure improved arterial oxygenation over and above that seen with CV with positive end-expiratory pressure alone. Proposed mechanisms for BVV efficacy are discussed.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.665
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.262 · 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.

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

Citations88
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical Care MedicineSame topicRespiratory Support and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207