MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220726060 · doi:10.1097/aln.0000000000004161

Phrenic Nerve Block and Respiratory Effort in Pigs and Critically Ill Patients with Acute Lung Injury

2022· article· en· W4220726060 on OpenAlexaff
Sérgio M. Pereira, Bruno Erick Sinedino, Eduardo Leite Vieira Costa, Caio C. A. Morais, Michael C. Sklar, Cristhiano Adkson Sales Lima, Maria Aparecida Miyuki Nakamura, Otávio T. Ranzani, Ewan C. Goligher, Mauro R. Tucci, Chung-Chou H. Chang, Leandro Utino Taniguchi, Joaquim Edson Vieira, Laurent Brochard, Marcelo B. P. Amato

Bibliographic record

VenueAnesthesiology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRespiratory Support and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity Health NetworkToronto General HospitalSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAnesthesiaMechanical ventilationTranspulmonary pressurePhrenic nerveInterquartile rangeTidal volumeLidocaineVentilation (architecture)Respiratory systemLungLung volumesInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Strong spontaneous inspiratory efforts can be difficult to control and prohibit protective mechanical ventilation. Instead of using deep sedation and neuromuscular blockade, the authors hypothesized that perineural administration of lidocaine around the phrenic nerve would reduce tidal volume (VT) and peak transpulmonary pressure in spontaneously breathing patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome. METHODS: An established animal model of acute respiratory distress syndrome with six female pigs was used in a proof-of-concept study. The authors then evaluated this technique in nine mechanically ventilated patients under pressure support exhibiting driving pressure greater than 15 cm H2O or VT greater than 10 ml/kg of predicted body weight. Esophageal and transpulmonary pressures, electrical activity of the diaphragm, and electrical impedance tomography were measured in pigs and patients. Ultrasound imaging and a nerve stimulator were used to identify the phrenic nerve, and perineural lidocaine was administered sequentially around the left and right phrenic nerves. RESULTS: Results are presented as median [interquartile range, 25th to 75th percentiles]. In pigs, VT decreased from 7.4 ml/kg [7.2 to 8.4] to 5.9 ml/kg [5.5 to 6.6] (P < 0.001), as did peak transpulmonary pressure (25.8 cm H2O [20.2 to 27.2] to 17.7 cm H2O [13.8 to 18.8]; P < 0.001) and driving pressure (28.7 cm H2O [20.4 to 30.8] to 19.4 cm H2O [15.2 to 22.9]; P < 0.001). Ventilation in the most dependent part decreased from 29.3% [26.4 to 29.5] to 20.1% [15.3 to 20.8] (P < 0.001). In patients, VT decreased (8.2 ml/ kg [7.9 to 11.1] to 6.0 ml/ kg [5.7 to 6.7]; P < 0.001), as did driving pressure (24.7 cm H2O [20.4 to 34.5] to 18.4 cm H2O [16.8 to 20.7]; P < 0.001). Esophageal pressure, peak transpulmonary pressure, and electrical activity of the diaphragm also decreased. Dependent ventilation only slightly decreased from 11.5% [8.5 to 12.6] to 7.9% [5.3 to 8.6] (P = 0.005). Respiratory rate did not vary. Variables recovered 1 to 12.7 h [6.7 to 13.7] after phrenic nerve block. CONCLUSIONS: Phrenic nerve block is feasible, lasts around 12 h, and reduces VT and driving pressure without changing respiratory rate in patients under assisted ventilation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations6
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnesthesiologySame topicRespiratory Support and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207