Late Breaking Abstract - Bronchial Rheoplasty For Treatment of Chronic Bronchitis: 6 Month Results from a Prospective Multi-Center Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Chronic bronchitis (CB) is characterized by a productive cough due to excessive mucus production in the airways, resulting in quality of life impairment and increased exacerbation risk. Bronchial Rheoplasty (BR) is a procedure in which an endobronchial catheter applies non-thermal pulsed electric fields to the airways. Preclinical studies demonstrated epithelial ablation followed by rapid regeneration of normalized epithelium. The present study evaluated the feasibility, safety and efficacy of BR in CB patients. Methods: Prospective, multi-center study enrolling 32 patients who underwent BR under general anesthesia. Right-sided airways were treated first; the left side was treated one month later. Follow-up through 6 months included assessment of adverse events and changes in symptoms and quality of life (QOL) using the St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) and COPD Assessment Test (CAT). Results: Bronchial rheoplasty was successfully performed in all 32 patients (62.5% male, mean age 67, post-BD FEV1 64.1±20.8%, SGRQ 59.4±15.0). Respiratory serious adverse events through 6-months included COPD exacerbation (4 patients), mucosal sail (1 patient), pleural effusion (1 patient), and unrelated lung cancer (1 patient). Mean changes from baseline to 6 months in SGRQ and CAT scores were -14.0±3.4 points (p<0.001) and -7.5±1.5 points (p< 0.0001), respectively. Conclusion: This study provides clinical evidence of the feasibility, safety and clinical performance of BR in symptomatic CB patients. The results suggest that BR may provide improvement in symptoms and QOL for this patient population.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".