Usefulness of Parasternal Intercostal Muscle Ultrasound during Weaning from Mechanical Ventilation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The assessment of diaphragm function with diaphragm ultrasound seems to bring important clinical information to describe diaphragm work and weakness. When the diaphragm is weak, extradiaphragmatic muscles may play an important role, but whether ultrasound can also assess their activity and function is unknown. This study aimed to (1) evaluate the feasibility of measuring the thickening of the parasternal intercostal and investigate the responsiveness of this muscle to assisted ventilation; and (2) evaluate whether a combined evaluation of the parasternal and the diaphragm could predict failure of a spontaneous breathing trial. METHODS: First, an exploratory evaluation of the parasternal in 23 healthy subjects. Second, the responsiveness of parasternal to several pressure support levels were studied in 16 patients. Last, parasternal activity was compared in presence or absence of diaphragm dysfunction (assessed by magnetic stimulation of the phrenic nerves and ultrasound) and in case of success/failure of a spontaneous breathing trial in 54 patients. RESULTS: The parasternal was easily accessible in all patients. The interobserver reproducibility was good (intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.77 (95% CI, 0.53 to 0.89). There was a progressive decrease in parasternal muscle thickening fraction with increasing levels of pressure support (Spearman ρ = -0.61 [95% CI, -0.74 to -0.44]; P < 0.0001) and an inverse correlation between parasternal muscle thickening fraction and the pressure generating capacity of the diaphragm (Spearman ρ = -0.79 [95% CI, -0.87 to -0.66]; P < 0.0001). The parasternal muscle thickening fraction was higher in patients with diaphragm dysfunction: 17% (10 to 25) versus 5% (3 to 8), P < 0.0001. The pressure generating capacity of the diaphragm, the diaphragm thickening fraction and the parasternal thickening fraction similarly predicted failure or the spontaneous breathing trial. CONCLUSIONS: Ultrasound assessment of the parasternal intercostal muscle is feasible in the intensive care unit and provides novel information regarding the respiratory capacity load balance.
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 | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".