Response of Very Premature Infants with Bronchopulmonary Dysplasia to Inhaled Salbutamol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bronchopulmonary Dysplasia (BPD) is the most common chronic respiratory disease found in premature infants following prolonged supplemental oxygen and mechanical ventilation. Although salbutamol, a selective ß2 agonist, is known to relax the hypertrophied smooth muscles around the small airways in adults, earlier literature has suggested that neonates did not have enough peribronchial smooth muscle for constriction and thus lacked a bronchodilatory response to ß2 agonists. The present study was designed to determine whether infants of less than 32 weeks gestational age with elevated lung resistance were responsive to salbutamol. Nineteen premature infants (mean gestational age 26.0 +/- 2.1 weeks and mean birth weight 851.3 +/- 244.4 g) were recruited for the study. Immediately before and 30 minutes after the commencement of nebulized salbutamol administration, a minimum of 15 breaths were measured and analyzed for each patient. From this breath-by-breath analysis, the lung mechanics and Work of Breathing (WOB) were calculated. Results were then compared by paired t-tests. The use of salbutamol resulted in a significant improvement in airway resistance (p = 0.008) and tendency for impedance reduction. These results indicate that very premature infants (< 32 weeks) with BPD respond favorably to bronchodilators. Although the mechanism of action remains to be elucidated, salbutamol most probably achieves its effects through the relaxation of the hypertrophied peribronchial smooth muscle. Early intervention to relieve airway obstruction may promote early weaning from mechanical ventilation and diminish both duration and severity of BPD.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 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".