Mechanisms of orthopnoea in patients with advanced COPD
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many patients with severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) report an unpleasant respiratory sensation at rest, which is further amplified by adoption of a supine position (orthopnoea). The mechanisms of this acute symptomatic deterioration are poorly understood. Sixteen patients with advanced COPD and a history of orthopnoea and 16 age- and sex-matched healthy controls underwent pulmonary function tests (PFTs) and detailed sensory–mechanical measurements including inspiratory neural drive (IND) assessed by diaphragm electromyography (EMG di ), oesophageal pressure ( P es ) and gastric pressure ( P ga ), in both sitting and supine positions. Patients had severe airflow obstruction (forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV 1 ): 40±18% pred) and lung hyperinflation. Regardless of the position, patients had lower inspiratory capacity (IC) and higher IND for a given tidal volume ( V T ) ( i.e. greater neuromechanical dissociation (NMD)), higher intensity of breathing discomfort, higher minute ventilation ( V ′ E ) and higher breathing frequency ( f B ) compared with controls (all p<0.05). For controls in a supine position, IC increased by 0.48 L versus sitting erect, with a small drop in V ′ E , mainly due to reduced f B (all p<0.05). By contrast, IC remained unaltered in patients with COPD, but dynamic lung compliance ( C Ldyn ) decreased (p<0.05) in the supine position. Breathing discomfort, inspiratory work of breathing (WOB), inspiratory effort, IND, NMD and neuroventilatory uncoupling all increased in COPD patients in the supine position (p<0.05), but not in the healthy controls. Orthopnoea was associated with acute changes in IND (r=0.65, p=0.01), neuroventilatory uncoupling (r=0.76, p=0.001) and NMD (r=0.73, p=0.002). In COPD, onset of orthopnoea coincided with an abrupt increase in elastic loading of the inspiratory muscles in recumbency, in association with increased IND and greater NMD of the respiratory system.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".