MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390660778 · doi:10.1177/08850666231224396

Simultaneous Venous-Arterial Doppler Ultrasound During Early Fluid Resuscitation to Characterize a Novel Doppler Starling Curve: A Prospective Observational Pilot Study

2024· article· en· W4390660778 on OpenAlexaff
Jon‐Émile S. Kenny, Ross Prager, Philippe Rola, Korbin Haycock, Stanley O. Gibbs, Delaney Johnston, Christine Horner, Joseph K. Eibl, Vivian C. Lau, Benjamin O. Kemp

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Intensive Care Medicine · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHemodynamic Monitoring and Therapy
Canadian institutionsNOSM UniversityWestern UniversityHealth Sciences North
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineResuscitationObservational studyDoppler ultrasoundDoppler effectCardiologyUltrasoundStarlingInternal medicineRadiologyEmergency medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The likelihood of a patient being preload responsive—a state where the cardiac output or stroke volume (SV) increases significantly in response to preload—depends on both cardiac filling and function. This relationship is described by the canonical Frank-Starling curve. Research Question: We hypothesize that a novel method for phenotyping hypoperfused patients (ie, the “Doppler Starling curve”) using synchronously measured jugular venous Doppler as a marker of central venous pressure (CVP) and corrected flow time of the carotid artery (ccFT) as a surrogate for SV will refine the pretest probability of preload responsiveness/unresponsiveness. Study Design and Methods: We retrospectively analyzed a prospectively collected convenience sample of hypoperfused adult emergency department (ED) patients. Doppler measurements were obtained before and during a preload challenge using a wireless, wearable Doppler ultrasound system. Based on internal jugular and carotid artery Doppler surrogates of CVP and SV, respectively, we placed hemodynamic assessments into quadrants (Q x ) prior to preload augmentation: low CVP with normal SV (Q 1 ), high CVP and normal SV (Q 2 ), low CVP and low SV (Q 3 ) and high CVP and low SV (Q 4 ). The proportion of preload responsive and unresponsive assessments in each quadrant was calculated based on the maximal change in ccFT (ccFT Δ ) during either a passive leg raise or rapid fluid challenge. Results: We analyzed 41 patients (68 hemodynamic assessments) between February and April 2021. The prevalence of each phenotype was: 15 (22%) in Q 1 , 8 (12%) in Q 2 , 39 (57%) in Q 3 , and 6 (9%) in Q 4 . Preload unresponsiveness rates were: Q 1 , 20%; Q 2 , 50%; Q 3 , 33%, and Q 4 , 67%. Interpretation: Even fluid naïve ED patients with sonographic estimates of low CVP have high rates of fluid unresponsiveness, making dynamic testing valuable to prevent ineffective IVF administration.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.277 · 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 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

Citations15
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Intensive Care MedicineSame topicHemodynamic Monitoring and TherapyFrench-language works237,207