Cardiorespiratory failure in rat induced by severe inspiratory resistive loading
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The mechanisms underlying acute respiratory failure induced by respiratory loads are unclear. We hypothesized that, in contrast to a moderate inspiratory resistive load, a severe one would elicit central respiratory failure (decreased respiratory drive) before diaphragmatic injury and fatigue. We also wished to elucidate the factors that predict endurance time and peak tracheal pressure generation. Anesthetized rats breathed air against a severe load ( approximately 75% of the peak tracheal pressure generated during a 30-s occlusion) until pump failure (fall in tracheal pressure to half; mean 38 min). Hypercapnia and hypoxemia developed rapidly ( approximately 4 min), coincident with diaphragmatic fatigue (decreased ratio of transdiaphragmatic pressure to peak integrated phrenic activity) and the detection in blood of the fast isoform of skeletal troponin I (muscle injury). At approximately 23 min, respiratory frequency and then blood pressure fell, followed immediately by secondary diaphragmatic fatigue. Blood taken after termination of loading contained cardiac troponin T (myocardial injury). Contrary to our hypothesis, diaphragmatic fatigue and injury occurred early in loading before central failure, evident only as a change in the timing but not the drive component of the central respiratory pattern generator. Stepwise multiple regression analysis selected changes in mean arterial pressure and arterial Pco(2) during loading as the principal contributing factors in load endurance time, and changes in mean arterial pressure as the principal contributing factor in peak tracheal pressure generation. In conclusion, the temporal development of respiratory failure is not stereotyped but depends on load magnitude; moreover respiratory loads induce cardiorespiratory, not just respiratory, failure.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".