MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200242388 · doi:10.1177/1098612x211064697

Ultrasonographically derived caudal vena cava parameters acquired in a standing position and lateral recumbency in healthy, lightly sedated cats: a pilot study

2021· article· en· W4200242388 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Feline Medicine and Surgery · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHemodynamic Monitoring and Therapy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersMassey University
KeywordsVena cavaPosition (finance)Intravascular volume statusProne positionInferior vena cavaUltrasonography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives The aim of this study was to determine the feasibility of ultrasonographically measuring the caudal vena cava (CVC) at the subxiphoid view of healthy, lightly sedated cats in a standing position and lateral recumbency. Methods This was a prospective, observational, experimental single-centre study. Twenty healthy research-purposed cats were enrolled. Two trained operators scanned each cat in two positions – standing and lateral recumbency – in a randomised order. CVC diameter was measured at the narrowest diameter during inspiration and at the widest diameter during expiration, at two anatomical locations along the CVC – where the CVC crosses the diaphragm (base) and 2 mm caudal to the diaphragm. The CVC collapsibility index (CVC-CI) was calculated for each site. Normalcy was assessed with a Shapiro–Wilk test. A one-way ANOVA with post-hoc Tukey’s test was used to compare inspiratory with expiratory values within and between groups. A paired t -test compared the CVC-CI between groups ( P ⩽0.05 indicated statistical significance). Spearman’s correlation and Bland–Altman analysis assessed inter-operator variability. Results All ultrasonographic data passed normalcy and were reported as mean ± SD. When compared with each other, inspiratory and expiratory values were statistically different for position, location and operator (all P <0.0001). There was no statistically significant difference between lateral recumbency or standing position for inspiratory, expiratory and CVC-CI values. Inter-operator variability was substantial, with operator 2 consistently obtaining smaller measurements than operator 1. The mean CVC-CI in lateral recumbency at the base was 24% for operator 1 and 37% for operator 2. For the same site in standing position, CVC-CI was 27% and 41% for operators 1 and 2, respectively. Conclusions and relevance This pilot study demonstrates that it is possible to ultrasonographically measure the CVC diameter in both lateral recumbency and a standing position in healthy, lightly sedated cats. However, measurements obtained are operator dependent with variability between individuals. Further studies are needed to determine if ultrasonographic CVC assessment will prove helpful in estimating intravascular volume status in cats.

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)0.002
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 score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.534

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations9
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Feline Medicine and SurgerySame topicHemodynamic Monitoring and TherapyFrench-language works237,207