MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3115444562 · doi:10.1111/anae.15335

Evaluating the ventilatory effect of transnasal humidified rapid insufflation ventilatory exchange in apnoeic small children with two different oxygen flow rates: a randomised controlled trial <sup>*</sup>

2020· article· en· W3115444562 on OpenAlexaff
Thomas Riva, Nadège Préel, Lorenz Theiler, Robert Greif, Lukas Bütikofer, Francis Ulmer, Stefan Seiler, Sabine Nabecker

Bibliographic record

VenueAnaesthesia · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAirway Management and Intubation Techniques
Canadian institutionsSinai Health SystemUniversity of Toronto
FundersCentre Hospitalier Universitaire VaudoisInselspital, Universitätsspital Bern
KeywordsMedicineAnesthesiaInsufflationCarbon dioxideOxygenationChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Transnasal humidified rapid insufflation ventilatory exchange prolongs safe apnoeic oxygenation time in children. In adults, transnasal humidified rapid insufflation ventilatory exchange is reported to have a ventilatory effect with PaCO 2 levels increasing less rapidly than without it. This ventilatory effect has yet to be reproduced in children. In this non‐inferiority study, we tested the hypothesis that children weighing 10–15 kg exhibit no difference in carbon dioxide clearance when comparing two different high‐flow nasal therapy flow rates during a 10‐min apnoea period. Following standardised induction of anaesthesia including neuromuscular blockade, patients were randomly allocated to high‐flow nasal therapy of 100% oxygen at 2 or 4 l.kg −1 .min −1 . Airway patency was ensured by continuous jaw thrust. The study intervention was terminated for safety reasons when SpO 2 values dropped &lt; 95%, or transcutaneous carbon dioxide levels rose &gt; 9.3 kPa, or near‐infrared spectroscopy values dropped &gt; 20% from their baseline values, or after an apnoeic period of 10 min. Fifteen patients were included in each group. In the 2 l.kg −1 .min −1 group, mean (SD) transcutaneous carbon dioxide increase was 0.46 (0.11) kPa.min −1 , while in the 4 l.kg −1 .min −1 group it was 0.46 (0.12) kPa.min −1 . The upper limit of a one‐sided 95%CI for the difference between groups was 0.07 kPa.min −1 , lower than the predefined non‐inferiority margin of 0.147 kPa.min −1 (p = 0.001). The lower flow rate of 2 l.kg −1 .min −1 was non‐inferior to 4 l.kg −1 .min −1 relative to the transcutaneous carbon dioxide increase. In conclusion, an additional ventilatory effect of either 2 or 4 l.kg −1 .min −1 high‐flow nasal therapy in apnoeic children weighing 10–15 kg appears to be absent.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.089
Threshold uncertainty score0.784

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.266 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations18
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnaesthesiaSame topicAirway Management and Intubation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207