MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386163898 · doi:10.1186/s13054-023-04607-2

Estimation of transpulmonary driving pressure during synchronized mechanical ventilation using a single lower assist maneuver (LAM) in rabbits: a comparison to measurements made with an esophageal balloon

2023· article· en· W4386163898 on OpenAlexaff
Ling Liu, Hongliang Li, Cong Lu, Purab Patel, Danqiong Wang, Jennifer Beck, Christer A. Sinderby

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Care · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMechanical Circulatory Support Devices
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityUniversity of TorontoDe Beers (Canada)St. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTranspulmonary pressureMedicineMechanical ventilationAnesthesiaVentilation (architecture)Diaphragm (acoustics)Respiratory minute volumeBalloonCardiologyRespiratory systemInternal medicineLung volumesLung

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Mechanical ventilation is applied to unload the respiratory muscles, but knowledge about transpulmonary driving pressure (Δ P L ) is important to minimize lung injury. We propose a method to estimate Δ P L during neurally synchronized assisted ventilation, with a simple intervention of lowering the assist for one breath (“lower assist maneuver”, LAM). Methods In 24 rabbits breathing spontaneously with imposed loads, titrations of increasing assist were performed, with two neurally synchronized modes: neurally adjusted ventilatory assist (NAVA) and neurally triggered pressure support (NPS). Two single LAM breaths (not sequentially, but independently) were performed at each level of assist by acutely setting the assist to zero cm H2O (NPS) or NAVA level 0 cm H2O/uV (NAVA) for one breath. NPS and NAVA titrations were followed by titrations in controlled-modes (volume control, VC and pressure control, PC), under neuro-muscular blockade. Breaths from the NAVA/NPS titrations were matched (for flow and volume) to VC or PC. Throughout all runs, we measured diaphragm electrical activity (Edi) and esophageal pressure ( P ES ). We measured Δ P L during the spontaneous modes ( P L _ P ES ) and controlled mechanical ventilation (CMV) modes ( P L _ CMV ) with the esophageal balloon. From the LAMs, we derived an estimation of Δ P L (“ P L_LAM ”) using a correction factor (ratio of volume during the LAM and volume during assist) and compared it to measured Δ P L during passive (VC or PC) and spontaneous breathing (NAVA or NPS). A requirement for the LAM was similar Edi to the assisted breath. Results All animals successfully underwent titrations and LAMs for NPS/NAVA. One thousand seven-hundred ninety-two (1792) breaths were matched to passive ventilation titrations (matched Vt, r = 0.99). P L_LAM demonstrated strong correlation with P L _ CMV ( r = 0.83), and P L _ P ES ( r = 0.77). Bland–Altman analysis revealed little difference between the predicted P L _ LAM and measured P L _ CMV (Bias = 0.49 cm H2O and 1.96SD = 3.09 cm H2O). For P L _ P ES , the bias was 2.2 cm H2O and 1.96SD was 3.4 cm H2O. Analysis of Edi and P ES at peak Edi showed progressively increasing uncoupling with increasing assist. Conclusion During synchronized mechanical ventilation, a LAM breath allows for estimations of transpulmonary driving pressure, without measuring P ES , and follows a mathematical transfer function to describe respiratory muscle unloading during synchronized assist.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.162
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.249 · 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.

Study designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical CareSame topicMechanical Circulatory Support DevicesFrench-language works237,207