MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4283512910 · doi:10.1113/jp282717

Influence of respiratory loading on left‐ventricular function in cervical spinal cord injury

2022· article· en· W4283512910 on OpenAlexaff
Cameron M. Gee, Alexandra M. Williams, Carli M. Peters, Neil D. Eves, A. William Sheel, Christopher R. West

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physiology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Cord Injury Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusKelowna General HospitalInterior HealthUniversity of British ColumbiaInternational Collaboration On Repair DiscoveriesOkanagan University College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCardiologyInternal medicineExpirationRespiratory systemSpinal cord injuryAnesthesiaSpinal cord

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Cervical spinal cord injury (C‐SCI) negatively impacts cardiac and respiratory function. As the heart and lungs are linked via the pulmonary circuit these systems are interdependent. Here, we utilized inspiratory and expiratory loading to assess whether augmenting the respiratory pump improves left‐ventricular (LV) filling and output in individuals with motor‐complete C‐SCI. We hypothesized LV end‐diastolic volume (LVEDV) would increase and decrease with inspiratory and expiratory loading, respectively. Participants (C‐SCI: 7M/1F, 35 ± 7 years; able‐bodied: 7M/1F, 32 ± 6 years) were assessed under five conditions during 45° head‐up tilt; unloaded, inspiratory loading with −10 and −20 cmH2O oesophageal pressure (Poes) on inspiration, and expiratory loading with +10 and +20 cmH2O Poes on expiration. An oesophageal balloon catheter monitored Poes, and LV structure and function were assessed by echocardiography. In C‐SCI only, (1) +20 cmH2O reduced LVEDV vs. unloaded (81 ± 15 vs. 88 ± 11 ml, P = 0.006); (2) heart rate was higher during +20 cmH2O compared to unloaded (P = 0.001) and +10 cmH2O (P = 0.002); (3) cardiac output was higher during +20 cmH2O than unloaded (P = 0.002); and (4) end‐expiratory lung volume was higher during +20 cmH2O vs. unloaded (63 ± 10 vs. 55 ± 13% total lung capacity, P = 0.003) but was unaffected by inspiratory loading. In both groups, −10 and −20 cmH2O had no significant effect on LVEDV. These findings suggest greater expiratory positive pressure acutely impairs LV filling in C‐SCI, potentially via impaired venous return, mediastinal constraint and/or direct ventricular interaction subsequent to dynamic hyperinflation. Inspiratory loading did not significantly improve LV function in C‐SCI and neither inspiratory nor expiratory loading affected cardiac function or lung volumes in able‐bodied participants. image Key points Cervical spinal cord injury (C‐SCI) alters both the cardiac and the respiratory system, but little is known about how these systems interact following injury. Here, we manipulated inspiratory or expiratory intrathoracic pressure (ITP) to mechanistically test the role of the respiratory pump in circulatory function in highly trained individuals with C‐SCI and an able‐bodied reference group. In individuals with C‐SCI, greater ITP during expiratory loading caused dynamic hyperinflation that was associated with impaired left‐ventricular filling. More negative ITP during inspiratory loading did not significantly alter left‐ventricular volumes in either group. Interventions that prevent dynamic hyperinflation and/or enhance the ability to generate expiratory pressures may help preserve left‐ventricular filling in individuals with C‐SCI.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.326 · 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

Citations7
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Physiology→Same topicSpinal Cord Injury Research→French-language works237,207→