MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2783794729 · doi:10.1164/rccm.201706-1244oc

High Positive End-Expiratory Pressure Renders Spontaneous Effort Noninjurious

2018· article· en· W2783794729 on OpenAlexaff
Caio C. A. Morais, Yukiko Koyama, Takeshi Yoshida, Glauco M. Plens, Susimeire Gomes, Cristhiano Adkson Sales Lima, Ozires Ramos, Sérgio M. Pereira, Naomasa Kawaguchi, Hirofumi Yamamoto, Akinori Uchiyama, João Batista Borges, Marcos F. Vidal Melo, Mauro R. Tucci, Marcelo B. P. Amato, Brian P. Kavanagh, Eduardo Leite Vieira Costa, Yuji Fujino

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRespiratory Support and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteNational Institutes of HealthMiljø- og Fødevareministeriet
KeywordsARDSMedicineLungAnesthesiaMechanical ventilationLung volumesCardiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

RATIONALE: In acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), atelectatic solid-like lung tissue impairs transmission of negative swings in pleural pressure (Ppl) that result from diaphragmatic contraction. The localization of more negative Ppl proportionally increases dependent lung stretch by drawing gas either from other lung regions (e.g., nondependent lung [pendelluft]) or from the ventilator. Lowering the level of spontaneous effort and/or converting solid-like to fluid-like lung might render spontaneous effort noninjurious. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether spontaneous effort increases dependent lung injury, and whether such injury would be reduced by recruiting atelectatic solid-like lung with positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP). METHODS: Established models of severe ARDS (rabbit, pig) were used. Regional histology (rabbit), inflammation (positron emission tomography; pig), regional inspiratory Ppl (intrabronchial balloon manometry), and stretch (electrical impedance tomography; pig) were measured. Respiratory drive was evaluated in 11 patients with ARDS. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Although injury during muscle paralysis was predominantly in nondependent and middle lung regions at low (vs. high) PEEP, strong inspiratory effort increased injury (indicated by positron emission tomography and histology) in dependent lung. Stronger effort (vs. muscle paralysis) caused local overstretch and greater tidal recruitment in dependent lung, where more negative Ppl was localized and greater stretch was generated. In contrast, high PEEP minimized lung injury by more uniformly distributing negative Ppl, and lowering the magnitude of spontaneous effort (i.e., deflection in esophageal pressure observed in rabbits, pigs, and patients). CONCLUSIONS: Strong effort increased dependent lung injury, where higher local lung stress and stretch was generated; effort-dependent lung injury was minimized by high PEEP in severe ARDS, which may offset need for paralysis.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.299
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 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

Citations243
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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