Interdependence of flow between lobes reduces maximal emptying postresection in dogs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effect of pulmonary resection on the maximal emptying of the remaining lobes was examined in an open-chest preparation in normal canine lungs and in a unilobar papain emphysema model. The objectives were to determine whether, compared with when both lungs were deflated (BL), maximal emptying of the normal lower lobes or the emphysematous right lower lobe would be altered 1) when acute pneumonectomy of the contralateral lung was performed (OL) and 2) when the lower lobe deflated alone (LA). The alveolar capsule technique was used to measure alveolar pressures (Palv) at 75, 50, and 30% lobar vital capacity (VC). During forced deflation, the maximal rates of deflation (dPalv/dt) and flows (lobarV(max)) of the lower lobes were determined under the three different conditions. The Pitot-static tube technique was used to measure intrabronchial pressures and to estimate bronchial area and compliance in which values were obtained at the same central airway during the conditions studied. The results showed that, compared with BL and OL, dPalv/dt and lobar V(max) decreased during LA (P < 0.05). These findings were due to a reduction in bronchial area during LA that limited flow at a lower maximal value compared with BL. This decrease in area appeared to be due to a change in bronchial pressure area behavior that resulted in a smaller bronchial area during LA for similar transmural pressures between conditions. There were no differences in findings between normal and emphysematous lobes. This study suggested that removal of lobes may alter the pressure area behavior of central airways. Possible mechanisms considered were differences in axial tension between conditions, negative effort dependence, or parenchymal-bronchial interdependence that may be relevant to understanding the dynamic collapsibility of central as well as intraparenchymal airways.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".