Impact of liberal versus conservative saturation targets on gas exchange indices in COVID-19 related acute respiratory distress syndrome: a physiological study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare gas exchange indices behavior by using liberal versus conservative oxygenation targets in patients with moderate to severe acute respiratory distress syndrome secondary to COVID-19 under invasive mechanical ventilation. We also assessed the influence of high FiO2 on respiratory system mechanics. METHODS: We prospectively included consecutive patients aged over 18 years old with a diagnosis of COVID-19 and moderate-severe acute respiratory distress syndrome. For each patient, we randomly applied two FiO2 protocols to achieve SpO2 88% - 92% or 96%. We assessed oxygenation indices and respiratory system mechanics. RESULTS: We enrolled 15 patients. All the oxygenation indices were significantly affected by the FiO2 strategy (p < 0.05) selected. The PaO2/FiO2 deteriorated, PA-aO2 increased and Pa/AO2 decreased significantly when using FiO2 to achieve SpO2 96%. Conversely, the functional shunt fraction was reduced. Respiratory mechanics were not affected by the FiO2 strategy. CONCLUSION: A strategy aimed at liberal oxygenation targets significantly deteriorated gas exchange indices, except for functional shunt, in COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome. The respiratory system mechanics were not altered by the FiO2 strategy.Clinical Trials Register: NCT04486729.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".