Assessment of upper airway dynamics by anterior magnetic phrenic stimulation in conscious sleep apnea patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Phrenic nerve magnetic stimulation (PNMS) performed anterolaterally at the base of the neck (BAMPS) and cervical magnetic stimulation are common techniques for assessing upper airway (UA) mechanical properties in conscious humans. We considered that if NMS performed at the sternal level (a-MS) could induce a similar percentage of flow-limited twitches as BAMPS in conscious subjects, gauging UA dynamic properties by PNMS would be simplified. Instantaneous flow, pharyngeal and esophageal pressures, as well as thoraco-abdominal motion were recorded in 10 conscious sleep apnea patients. BAMPS and a-MS were applied at end expiration. The percentage of flow-limited twitches, maximal tolerated intensity, and minimal stimulator output associated with flow-limited twitches were similar between BAMPS and a-MS. Examining the effects of stimulation site, stimulation intensity and site*intensity interaction on the characteristics of flow-limited twitches, the former was responsible for more negative peak esophageal pressure (BAMPS: -11.5 ± 0.9 cmH(2)O; a-MS: -6.5 ± 1.1 cmH(2)O; P = 0.002) and UA closing pressure (BAMPS: -7.7 ± 0.5 cmH(2)O; a-MS: -5.8 ± 0.6 cmH(2)O; P = 0.02) as well as for lower mean linear upper airway resistance (UAR) (BAMPS 3.5 ± 0.4 cmH(2)O·l(-1)·s(-1); a-MS 2.2 ± 0.4 cmH(2)O·l(-1)·s(-1); P = 0.02). a-MS systematically evoked outward/inward thoracic displacement, although this movement pattern was observed in only 50% of patients when they were subjected to BAMPS. Linear UAR of BAMPS-induced flow-limited twitches was lower in the presence of initial outward thoracic movement (2 ± 0.05 cmH(2)O·l(-1)·s(-1)) than with inward motion (4.3 ± 1.5 cmH(2)O·l(-1)·s(-1); P = 0.03). We conclude that a-MS represents a practical and functional technique to evaluate UA mechanical properties in conscious sleep apnea patients.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".