An Initial Investigation of Diaphragm Neurostimulation in Patients with Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Lung protective ventilation aims at limiting lung stress and strain. By reducing the amount of pressure transmitted by the ventilator into the lungs, diaphragm neurostimulation offers a promising approach to minimize ventilator-induced lung injury. This study investigates the physiologic effects of diaphragm neurostimulation in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) patients. The hypothesis was that diaphragm neurostimulation would improve oxygenation, would limit the distending pressures of the lungs, and would improve cardiac output. METHODS: Patients with moderate ARDS were included after 48 h of invasive mechanical ventilation and had a left subclavian catheter placed to deliver bilateral transvenous phrenic nerve stimulation. Two 60-min volume-controlled mechanical ventilation (control) sessions were interspersed by two 60-min diaphragm neurostimulation sessions delivered continually, in synchrony with the ventilator. Gas exchange, lung mechanics, chest electrical impedance tomography, and cardiac index were continuously monitored and compared across four sessions. The primary endpoint was the Pao2/fraction of inspired oxygen (Fio2) ratio at the end of each session, and the secondary endpoints were lung mechanics and hemodynamics. RESULTS: Thirteen patients were enrolled but the catheter could not be inserted in one, leaving 12 patients for analysis. All sessions were conducted without interruption and well tolerated. The Pao2/Fio2 ratio did not change during the four sessions. Median (interquartile range) plateau pressure was 23 (20 to 31) cm H2O and 21 (17 to 25) cm H2O, driving pressure was 14 (12 to 18) cm H2O and 11 (10 to 13) cm H2O, and end-inspiratory transpulmonary pressure was 9 (5 to 11) cm H2O and 7 (4 to 11) cm H2O during mechanical ventilation alone and during mechanical ventilation + neurostimulation session, respectively. The dorsal/ventral ventilation surface ratio was 0.70 (0.54 to 0.91) when on mechanical ventilation and 1.20 (0.76 to 1.33) during the mechanical ventilation + neurostimulation session. The cardiac index was 2.7 (2.3 to 3.5) l · min-1 · m-2 on mechanical ventilation and 3.0 (2.4 to 3.9) l · min-1 · m-2 on mechanical ventilation + neurostimulation. CONCLUSIONS: This proof-of-concept study showed the feasibility of short-term diaphragm neurostimulation in conjunction with mechanical ventilation in ARDS patients. Diaphragm neurostimulation was associated with positive effects on lung mechanics and on hemodynamics.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".