146 Lung Volume in Very Preterm Infants with Early Respiratory Distress Syndrome (RDS) Receiving Nasal Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background and aims Although CPAP is extensively used for early RDS in very preterm infants from birth, the influence of CPAP on lung behaviour in early illness remains unclear. This study aimed to describe global volumetric behaviour and work of breathing (WOB) at differing continuous distending pressures (CDP) in very preterm infants in the first 12–18 hrs of life. Methods Infants < 32 weeks’ gestational age receiving nasal CPAP from birth were studied whilst supine. Data were initially recorded at the CPAP in clinical use [baseline; mean (SD) 6(1) cmH2O, FiO2 0.25(0.03)]. Then, CPAP was applied at 5, 8, 10 and 8 cmH2O for 15-mins each. Changes in end-expiratory lung volume [ΔEELV (VT units)] and tidal volume [ΔVT (VT units)] were measured using respiratory inductive plethysmography and expressed relative to values obtained at CPAP 5 cmH2O. Breath-to-breath phase angles (Θ) and labour breathing index (LBI) were calculated post-hoc to determine respiratory asynchrony. Results Twenty infants, mean(SD) GA 29(1) weeks and BW 1181(417)g were studied at median (IQR) 15(13.16)hours. No significant differences were seen in global EELV, VT, WOB or LBI at all CDP. Only 11/20 infants demonstrated hysteresis with a significant increase in EELV from baseline following a CPAP recruitment manoeuvre. Conclusions Not all preterm infants have recruitable lung disease. Infants with recruitable lung disease may benefit from a CPAP recruitment manoeuvre. Further work is needed to define the optimal CPAP level to use in early RDS.
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".