SU‐C‐218‐04: Comparison of Respiratory Gated Micro‐CT in Mechanically Ventilated and Free‐Breathing Rats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: Lung imaging in preclinical studies can be performed using respiratory‐gated micro‐computed tomography in mechanically ventilated or free‐breathing rodents. In this study, we aim to quantify the differences in lung metrics measured in free‐breathing and mechanically ventilated rodents. Methods: Male sprague‐dawley rats were anaesthetized with ketamine/xylazine and scanned with a retrospective respiratory gating protocol on a GE Locus Ultra micro‐CT scanner (80 kVp, 50 mA, 50 s, 0.28 Gy entrance dose). The rats were free‐breathing and scanned while externally monitoring the respiration. Each animal was intubated and mechanically ventilated (MV) at 56 bpm, 8 mL/kg and PEEP of 5 cm water and rescanned. Images were reconstructed representing peak inspiration and end expiration with 0.15 mm isotropic voxel spacing. Quantitative image‐ based measurements of lung volume and air content were used to calculate the functional residual capacity (FRC) and tidal volume. Measured and calculated values were compared (paired t‐tests). Results: Qualitatively, the images acquired during mechanical ventilation appeared darker in the airspaces and the airways appeared larger. Our image‐based measurements showed an increase in lung volume and air content during mechanical ventilation for both respiratory phases (Free 6.9 mL and MV 12.8 mL for peak inspiration and Free 5.6 mL and MV 10.5 mL at end expiration). Comparisons of the functional metrics showed an increase in both FRC and tidal volumes of mechanically ventilated rats (FRC of 3.2 mL for Free and 8.4 mL for MV, tidal volume of 2.7 mL/kg for Free and 6.1 mL/kg for MV). Conclusions: Although mechanical ventilation may be useful in promoting consistent respiratory patterns, the amount of air in the lungs is higher than in free‐breathing animals. Care should be taken in planning respiratory research to ensure that overinflating the lungs during mechanical ventilation will not compromise the desired measurements or free‐breathing animals should be used.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".