Optimization of lung ventilation and perfusion in anesthetized horses using a ventilation mode with flow-limited expiration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the mechanisms underlying the improved arterial oxygenation described with flow-limited expiration (FLEX) ventilation in anesthetized horses. ANIMALS: 5 healthy adult research horses. METHODS: Horses underwent volume-controlled ventilation for 60 minutes (VCV1), followed by 60 minutes of FLEX, and 30 minutes of VCV (VCV2). Main outcomes included the arterial partial pressure of oxygen-to-Fio2 (PF) ratio and electrical impedance tomography (EIT)-derived functional indices at the end of each phase. The EIT data were used to create regional maps of relative lung ventilation and perfusion as well as regional maps of ventilation/perfusion (V/Q) ratios. Ventilation indices derived from EIT included the fraction of expired volume in 1 second (FEV1; %) and the time it took for the EIT signal to drop to 50% of the peak signal at end-inspiration (TClose50; seconds). Data were analyzed with 2-way ANOVA for repeated measures. P < .05 was considered significant. RESULTS: The PF ratio increased significantly with FLEX compared to both VCV1 and VCV2 (P < .01). There were no differences in the relative distribution of ventilation nor perfusion between ventilation strategies. However, when ventilation and perfusion were superimposed and V/Q ratio maps were constructed, FLEX had a homogenizing effect toward values of 1.0. The FEV1 was shorter (P < .01) and the TClose50 was longer (P < .001) in all regions during FLEX compared to both VCV1 and VCV2. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Our findings suggest that FLEX ventilation in anesthetized horses enhances regional V/Q matching, likely by prolonging expiratory aeration and reducing airway closure.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".