MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Human respiratory muscle blood flow measured by near-infrared spectroscopy and indocyanine green

2008· article· en· W2074398234 on OpenAlexafffund
Jordan A. Guenette, Ioannis Vogiatzis, Spyros Zakynthinos, Dimitrios Athanasopoulos, Maria Koskolou, Spyretta Golemati, Maroula Vasilopoulou, Harrieth Wagner, Charis Roussos, Peter D. Wagner, Robert Boushel

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Physiology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNon-Invasive Vital Sign Monitoring
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMichael Smith Health Research BC
KeywordsBlood flowMedicineAnesthesiaBlood volumeIndocyanine greenAnatomyTidal volumeRespiratory systemChemistryCardiologySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Measurement of respiratory muscle blood flow (RMBF) in humans has important implications for understanding patterns of blood flow distribution during exercise in healthy individuals and those with chronic disease. Previous studies examining RMBF in humans have required invasive methods on anesthetized subjects. To assess RMBF in awake subjects, we applied an indicator-dilution method using near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) and the light-absorbing tracer indocyanine green dye (ICG). NIRS optodes were placed on the left seventh intercostal space at the apposition of the costal diaphragm and on an inactive control muscle (vastus lateralis). The primary respiratory muscles within view of the NIRS optodes include the internal and external intercostals. Intravenous bolus injection of ICG allowed for cardiac output (by the conventional dye-dilution method with arterial sampling), RMBF, and vastus lateralis blood flow to be quantified simultaneously. Esophageal and gastric pressures were also measured to calculate the work of breathing and transdiaphragmatic pressure. Measurements were obtained in five conscious humans during both resting breathing and three separate 5-min bouts of constant isocapnic hyperpnea at 27.1 +/- 3.2, 56.0 +/- 6.1, and 75.9 +/- 5.7% of maximum minute ventilation as determined on a previous maximal exercise test. RMBF progressively increased (9.9 +/- 0.6, 14.8 +/- 2.7, 29.9 +/- 5.8, and 50.1 +/- 12.5 ml 100 ml(-1) min(-1), respectively) with increasing levels of ventilation while blood flow to the inactive control muscle remained constant (10.4 +/- 1.4, 8.7 +/- 0.7, 12.9 +/- 1.7, and 12.2 +/- 1.8 ml 100 ml(-1) min(-1), respectively). As ventilation rose, RMBF was closely and significantly correlated with 1) cardiac output (r = 0.994, P = 0.006), 2) the work of breathing (r = 0.995, P = 0.005), and 3) transdiaphragmatic pressure (r = 0.998, P = 0.002). These data suggest that the NIRS-ICG technique provides a feasible and sensitive index of RMBF at different levels of ventilation in humans.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.203 · 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

Citations74
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied PhysiologySame topicNon-Invasive Vital Sign MonitoringFrench-language works237,207