MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3176205851 · doi:10.1088/1361-6579/ac0e85

Clinical value of electrical impedance tomography (EIT) in the management of patients with acute respiratory failure: a single centre experience

2021· article· en· W3176205851 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysiological Measurement · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRespiratory Support and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineElectrical impedance tomographyMechanical ventilationExtracorporeal membrane oxygenationRetrospective cohort studyVentilation (architecture)CohortCardiologyInternal medicineRadiologyTomography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Objective. We will describe our clinical experience using electrical impedance tomography (EIT) in the management of mechanical ventilation in patients with acute respiratory failure and to determine to which extent EIT-guided positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) setting differed from clinically set values. Approach. We conducted a retrospective, observational cohort study performed in a hub centre for the treatment of acute respiratory failure and veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). Main results. Between January 2017 and December 2019, EIT was performed 54 times in 41 patients, not feasible only in one case because of signal instability. More than 50% was on veno-venous ECMO support. In 16 cases (30%), EIT was used for monitoring mechanical ventilation, i.e. to evaluate recruitability or sigh setting. In 37 cases (70%), EIT was used to set PEEP both with incremental (11 cases in nine patients) and decremental (26 cases, 18 patients) PEEP trial. Clinical PEEP before the decremental PEEP trial (PEEP PRE ) was 14.1 ± 3.4 cmH2O and clinical PEEP set by clinicians after the PEEP trial (PEEP POST ) was 13.6 ± 3.1 (p = ns). EIT analyses demonstrated that more hypoxic patients were higher derecruited when compared to less hypoxic patients that were, on the contrary, more overdistended (p < 0.05). No acute effects of PEEP adjustment based on EIT on respiratory mechanics or regional EIT parameters modification were observed. Significance. The variability of EIT findings in our population confirmed the need to provide ventilation settings individually tailored and EIT was confirmed to be an optimal useful clinical bedside noninvasive tool to provide real-time monitoring of the PEEP effect and ventilation distribution.

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.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.385
Threshold uncertainty score0.421

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.238 · 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