Venous Air Emboli Occur During Release of Positive End-Expiratory Pressure and Repositioning After Sitting Position Surgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We studied the effect of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) release and positioning on the occurrence of venous air embolism (VAE). Eighteen consecutive patients (8 women, 10 men; ASA grade I–III) undergoing neurosurgery in the sitting position were studied. After induction of anesthesia ventilation was controlled with a PEEP of 5 cm H2O in an oxygen-air gas mixture. A transesophageal echocardiographic (TEE) probe was inserted. Preoperatively, a patent foramen ovale was excluded in all patients. TEE monitoring was performed during surgery, during PEEP release at the end of surgery with the patient still in the sitting position, and during change of the patient position into the supine position. The severity of VAE was differentiated as follows: grade 1 = only microbubbles; grade 2 = microbubbles and decrease of end-tidal carbon dioxide partial pressure (Petco2) by more than 1.5 mm Hg; grade 3 = microbubbles combined with a decrease of Petco2 by more than 1.5 mm Hg, and a decrease of mean arterial blood pressure by at least 20 mm Hg. During surgery, VAE with a grade of 1, 2 or 3 occurred in 7, 4, and 2 patients, respectively. After PEEP release, VAE of grades 1, 2, and 3 were observed in 7, 2, and 1 patients, respectively. During repositioning from sitting to supine position, VAE of grades 1, 2, and 3 was observed in 6, 1, and 1 patients, respectively. The patient with VAE grade 3 needed inotropic support until 2 h after surgery to maintain sufficient blood pressure. No patient showed any sign of paradoxical arterial embolism or cardiac dysfunction. We conclude that VAE occurs not only during surgery in the sitting position, but also with release of PEEP and during repositioning to the supine position.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 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".