MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2139260688 · doi:10.1164/rccm.2108078

Effects of Therapeutic Hypercapnia on Mesenteric Ischemia–Reperfusion Injury

2003· article· en· W2139260688 on OpenAlexafffund
John G. Laffey, Robert P. Jankov, Doreen Engelberts, A. Keith Tanswell, Martin Post, Thomas F. Lindsay, J. Brendan M. Mullen, Alex Romaschin, Derek Stephens, Colin McKerlie, Brian P. Kavanagh

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRespiratory Support and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineLungHypercapniaReperfusion injurySplanchnicAnesthesiaNormocapniaIschemiaARDSAcidosisCardiologyInternal medicineHemodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hypercapnic acidosis protects against direct lung injury in in vivo and ex vivo models, however, lung injury/acute respiratory distress syndrome commonly occurs after a nonpulmonary etiology. We investigated whether therapeutic hypercapnia (TH)-deliberate elevation of carbon dioxide (CO2) tension-would protect against lung injury after splanchnic ischemia-reperfusion injury in an in vivo model. TH was associated with preservation of lung mechanics, attenuation of protein leakage, and improved oxygenation compared with control conditions. Lung protection was therapeutic as well as prophylactic. Protection was dose-dependent, but inspired CO2 concentrations above 5.0% were associated with little additional lung protection. Before lung injury, increasing FICO2 resulted in a dose-dependent increase in PaO2. Lung protection with hypercapnia occurred despite pulmonary artery pressures that were greater than observed with normocapnia. Reperfusion increased lipid peroxidation (tissue 8-isoprostane concentration) in the bowel, liver, and lung, and caused histologically apparent bowel injury; however, none of these effects was altered by TH. Therefore, TH-induced by adding CO2 to inspired gas-provides consistent protection against lung injury in terms of lung permeability, oxygenation, and lung mechanics after mesenteric ischemia-reperfusion. These data further support the emerging evidence for ongoing physiologic study of TH at the bedside.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.158
Threshold uncertainty score0.613

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.312
Teacher spread0.298 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations95
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care MedicineSame topicRespiratory Support and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207