MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Abstract 12774: Detecting Change in Cardiopulmonary Bypass Blood Flow Rate With a Novel, Wireless, Wearable Doppler Ultrasound Patch: A Pilot Study

2022· article· en· W4380794799 on OpenAlexaff
Chelsea E. Munding, Jon‐Émile S. Kenny, Zhen Yang, Geoffrey D. Clarke, Mai Elfarnawany, Andrew M. Eibl, Joe K. Eibl, Bhanu Nalla, Rony Atoui

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular and Diving-Related Complications
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences NorthNOSM UniversityUniversity of Sudbury
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCardiopulmonary bypassDoppler effectFlow velocityBlood flowPreloadCommon carotid arteryPulse wave velocityCardiac cycleCardiologyHemodynamicsBiomedical engineeringInternal medicineCarotid arteriesBlood pressurePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Assessing preload reserve (PR) is important when managing cardiac surgery patients. Typically, a 10% change in cardiac output is used as a reference standard to gauge PR; how this change in cardiac output translates to common carotid artery (CCA) velocity is unknown. In this pilot study, we compared known changes in cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) flow rate to those measured by a novel wireless, wearable Doppler ultrasound placed over the CCA. Methods: A sample of 14 adult patients undergoing elective CABG was studied. While on CPB, at least two changes in blood flow (one negative, one positive) were made. The corresponding change in CCA velocity was measured by a wearable continuous wave (CW) Doppler ultrasound patch. For each subject, CPB flow changes were determined from the displayed spectrogram by the peristaltic pulsation frequency and CCA velocity changes were calculated from the automated maximum velocity trace. 5-10s windows pre- and post-CPB speed changes were selected, with sufficient signal quality to determine both relative CPB flow and CCA velocity. A “dose-response” curve was fitted to the relative changes in flow and velocity for each subject, as shown in Fig. 1, and the CCA velocity change corresponding to a 10% change in CPB flow was calculated. Results: CPB flows ranged from 0.5-6.3L/min. Mean relative flow changes were -58 and 179%, corresponding to mean CCA velocity changes of -43 and 107%. A mean CCA velocity change of 14% was found to correspond to 10% CPB flow change, ranging from 1.5-27.8%. Conclusions: CCA velocity measured with the Doppler patch successfully tracked changes in CPB flow. A CCA velocity change of >14% suggests a >10% change in cardiac output. Although preliminary, these results provide another important parameter for predicting the response to preload using a novel, easy-to-use, wireless Doppler device.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score0.802

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.253
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 teacher head, 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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculationSame topicCardiovascular and Diving-Related ComplicationsFrench-language works237,207