Technical and analytical approach to biventricular pressure-volume loops in swine including a completely endovascular, percutaneous closed-chest large animal model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pressure-volume (PV) loop analysis is a sophisticated invasive approach to quantifying load-dependent and independent measures of cardiac function. Biventricular (BV) PV loops allow left and right ventricular function to be quantified simultaneously and independently, which is important for conditions and certain physiologic states, such as ventricular decoupling or acute physiologic changes. BV PV loops can be performed in an entirely endovascular, percutaneous, and closed-chest setting. This technique is helpful in a survival animal model, as a percutaneous monitoring system during endovascular device experiments, or in cases where chest wall compliance is being tested or may be a confounder. In this article, we describe the end-to-end implementation of a completely endovascular, totally percutaneous, and closed-chest large animal model to obtain contemporaneous BV PV loops in 40 to 70 kg swine. We describe the associated surgical and technical challenges and our solutions to obtaining endovascular BV PV loops, closed-chest cardiac output, and stroke volume (including validation of the correction factor necessary for thermodilution), as well as how to perform endovascular inferior vena cava occlusion in this swine model. We also include techniques for data acquisition and analysis that are required for this method.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".