MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2769667260 · doi:10.1097/pcc.0000000000001385

Neural Breathing Pattern and Patient-Ventilator Interaction During Neurally Adjusted Ventilatory Assist and Conventional Ventilation in Newborns

2017· article· en· W2769667260 on OpenAlexaff
Pradeep Mally, Jennifer Beck, Christer A. Sinderby, Martha Caprio, Sean M. Bailey

Bibliographic record

VenuePediatric Critical Care Medicine · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience of respiration and sleep
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineVentilation (architecture)AnesthesiaApneaMechanical ventilationGestational ageApnea of prematurityDiaphragm (acoustics)Spontaneous breathing trialPregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To compare neurally adjusted ventilatory assist and conventional ventilation on patient-ventilator interaction and neural breathing patterns, with a focus on central apnea in preterm infants. DESIGN: Prospective, observational cross-over study of intubated and ventilated newborns. Data were collected while infants were successively ventilated with three different ventilator conditions (30 min each period): 1) synchronized intermittent mandatory ventilation (SIMV) combined with pressure support at the clinically prescribed, SIMV with baseline settings (SIMVBL), 2) neurally adjusted ventilatory assist, 3) same as SIMVBL, but with an adjustment of the inspiratory time of the mandatory breaths (SIMV with adjusted settings [SIMVADJ]) using feedback from the electrical activity of the diaphragm). SETTING: Regional perinatal center neonatal ICU. PATIENTS: Neonates admitted in the neonatal ICU requiring invasive mechanical ventilation. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Twenty-three infants were studied, with median (range) gestational age at birth 27 weeks (24-41 wk), birth weight 780 g (490-3,610 g), and 7 days old (1-87 d old). Patient ventilator asynchrony, as quantified by the NeuroSync index, was lower during neurally adjusted ventilatory assist (18.3% ± 6.3%) compared with SIMVBL (46.5% ±11.7%; p < 0.05) and SIMVADJ (45.8% ± 9.4%; p < 0.05). There were no significant differences in neural breathing parameters, or vital signs, except for the end-expiratory electrical activity of the diaphragm, which was lower during neurally adjusted ventilatory assist. Central apnea, defined as a flat electrical activity of the diaphragm more than 5 seconds, was significantly reduced during neurally adjusted ventilatory assist compared with both SIMV periods. These results were comparable for term and preterm infants. CONCLUSIONS: Patient-ventilator interaction appears to be improved with neurally adjusted ventilatory assist. Analysis of the neural breathing pattern revealed a reduction in central apnea during neurally adjusted ventilatory assist use.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations29
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePediatric Critical Care MedicineSame topicNeuroscience of respiration and sleepFrench-language works237,207