Clinical and echocardiography predictors of response to inhaled nitric oxide in hypoxemic term and near‐term neonates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Approximately 40% of hypoxemic term/near-term neonates are nonresponders to inhaled nitric oxide (iNO). Phenotypic characterization of patients less likely to respond may improve diagnostic precision and therapeutic decisions. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of neonates born ≥35 weeks gestation with hypoxemia who received iNO in the first 72 h of life and classified them into responders and nonresponders according to changes in the fraction of inspired oxygen, saturations and/or arterial partial pressure of oxygen after 1 h of administration. Comprehensive targeted neonatal echocardiography (TnECHO) data were collected when performed up to 6 h prior or 24 h after iNO initiation. Descriptive statistics, univariate analysis, and binary logistic regression were used to compare the groups. There were 183 patients included (63% responders) and TnECHO was performed in 54 infants. The presence of lung disease, and particularly meconium aspiration syndrome (p = .004), was associated with nonresponse to iNO. Nonresponders were characterized by a higher need for rescue high-frequency ventilation (p < .001), longer duration of mechanical ventilation (p < .001), and need for oxygen support (p = .003). Pulmonary hypertension documented on TnECHO was present in 96.3% of the patients but there was no difference in frequency or severity of pulmonary hypertension, or rates of low cardiac output between the groups. Moderate-to-severe right ventricular systolic dysfunction (p > .05) and lower left ventricular strain (p < .05) were more likely in the nonresponder group. In summary, response to iNO is influenced by lung disease, choice of ventilation strategy, and perhaps underlying cardiovascular physiology. Prospective pre- and post-iNO echocardiography data may provide novel physiologic insights.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".