O-100ISOLATED LUNG COLLAPSE IN TWO STAGES WITH BRONCHIAL BLOCKER: EQUIVALENT TO DOUBLE-LUMEN TUBE?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Double-lumen tube (DLT) and bronchial blocker (BB) are commonly used for OLV which is mandatory for VATS. It is believed that DLT tend to provide quicker and better quality lung collapse than BB. We hypothesized that two apnoea periods during initiation of OLV using BB would allow for similar quality and time to complete lung collapse compared to DLT. After IRB approval 40 patients requiring OLV for VATS were randomized in a prospective single blind (thoracic surgeons) trial. We compared left-side DLT (20 patients) to BB (20 patients), with the internal lumen occluded. In both groups OLV began once the patient was in lateral decubitus position (LDP). In the BB group, two 30-second periods of apnoea were performed: immediately after FOB verification of the BB position in LDP and just after incision of the pleura. Time from the start of OLV until complete lung collapse was recorded. The quality of the collapsed lung graded by the surgeon on a scale from 1 to 4 was also collected at 0, 5, 10 and 20 min (T0, T5, T10 and T20) after pleural incision. Surgeon's guess on which device was used for LI was recorded at the end of data collection. Fisher's exact test showed no difference in the demographics of our patients, for FEV1 or FEV1/FVC ratio. Mean time to complete lung collapse was 32.5 ± 11.8 min and 47.8 ± 35.9 min for BB and DLT groups respectively (P = 0.1 with Folded F). There was better lung collapse in the BB-group at T0 (P = 0.04). The surgeon's guess about the device used was incorrect in more than 50%. BB allows similar collapse time and quality of lung collapse than DLT. The surgeons were unable to correctly guess the device used in majority of cases. All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".