Posttraumatic Lung Injury After Pulmonary Contusion and Fat Embolism: Factors Determining Abnormal Gas Exchange
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The objective was to investigate changes in pulmonary blood flow after lung contusion and fat embolism. METHODS: Eighteen mongrel dogs were randomly assigned to three groups: fat embolism alone (n = 7); moderate unilateral pulmonary contusion followed by fat embolism (n = 6); and severe unilateral pulmonary contusion followed by fat embolism (n = 5). Fat embolism was produced by intramedullary reaming of left femur and tibia followed by canal pressurization using bone cement. Outcome measures were systemic blood pressure, pulmonary artery pressure, pulmonary artery occluded pressure, cardiac output (CO), and partial pressures of arterial and mixed venous oxygen (Pao2, PvO2). Samples were taken from contused and noncontused contralateral lung to calculate regional pulmonary blood flow. RESULTS: After the fat embolism, pulmonary artery pressure and pulmonary vascular resistance increased significantly (p < 0.05) in all groups, whereas Pao2 decreased in groups 2 and 3 and at 30 minutes in group 1. CO decreased significantly in group 3. Group 3 also demonstrated a greater initial decrease in Pao2 and PvO2 from baseline and a larger increase in pulmonary vascular resistance. In those animals that underwent contusion, regional pulmonary blood flow was not found to be different between contused and noncontused lung segments. After contusion, flow decreased significantly in contused and noncontused segments in group 3 only. CONCLUSIONS: Gas exchange deteriorates because of decreased CO. For any preexisting intrapulmonary shunt, the decrease of PvO2 will cause worsening of Pao2.
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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".