MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4297460935 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0273120

Changes in lung volume estimated by electrical impedance tomography during apnea and high-flow nasal oxygenation: A single-center randomized controlled trial

2022· article· en· W4297460935 on OpenAlexafffund
Thomas Riedel, Fabian Bürgi, Robert Greif, Heiko A. Kaiser, Thomas Riva, Lorenz Theiler, Sabine Nabecker

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRespiratory Support and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsSinai Health SystemUniversity of Toronto
FundersUniversity of TorontoStiftung für die Erforschung der Muskelkrankheiten
KeywordsMedicineAnesthesiaApneaFunctional residual capacityOxygenationSupine positionLung volumesIntubationLungInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Previous studies concerning humidified, heated high-flow nasal oxygen delivered in spontaneously breathing patients postulated an increase in functional residual capacity as one of its physiological effects. It is unclear wheter this is also true for patients under general anesthesia. METHODOLOGY: The sincle-center noninferiority trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT NCT03478774). This secondary outcome analysis shows estimated differences in lung volume changes using electrical impedance tomography between different flow rates of 100% oxygen in apneic, anesthetized and paralyzed adults prior to intubation. One hundred and twenty five patients were randomized to five groups with different flow rates of 100% oxygen: i) minimal-flow: 0.25 l.min-1 via endotracheal tube; ii) low-flow: 2 l.min-1 + continuous jaw thrust; iii) medium-flow: 10 l.min-1 + continuous jaw thrust; iv) high-flow: 70l.min-1 + continuous jaw thrust; and v) control: 70 l.min-1 + continuous video-laryngoscopy. After standardized anesthesia induction with non-depolarizing neuromuscular blockade, the 15-minute apnea period and oxygen delivery was started according to the randomized flow rate. Continuous electrical impedance tomography measurements were performed during the 15-minute apnea period. Total change in lung impedance (an estimate of changes in lung volume) over the 15-minute apnea period and times to 25%, 50% and 75% of total impedance change were calculated. RESULTS: One hundred and twenty five patients completed the original study. Six patients did not complete the 15-minute apnea period. Due to maloperation, malfunction and artefacts additional 54 measurements had to be excluded, resulting in 65 patients included into this secondary outcome analysis. We found no differences between groups with respect to decrease in lung impedance or curve progression over the observation period. CONCLUSIONS: Different flow rates of humidified 100% oxygen during apnea result in comparable decreases in lung volumes. The demonstrated increase in functional residual capacity during spontaneous breathing with high-flow nasal oxygenation could not be replicated during apnea under general anesthesia with neuromuscular blockade.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.004
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 designRandomized trial
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
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONE→Same topicRespiratory Support and Mechanisms→French-language works237,207→