MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400692743 · doi:10.2147/copd.s464506

Bronchial Rheoplasty for Chronic Bronchitis: Results from a Canadian Feasibility Study with RheOx®

2024· article· en· W4400692743 on OpenAlexaffabout
Marc Fortin, Del Dorscheid, Moïshe Liberman, Simon Martel, Tawimas Shaipanich

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of COPD · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTracheal and airway disorders
Canadian institutionsSt. Paul's HospitalCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalUniversity of British ColumbiaInstitut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCOPDChronic bronchitisExacerbationAdverse effectAirwayMucusBronchitisInternal medicineBronchiectasisQuality of life (healthcare)Chronic coughLungAsthmaGastroenterologyAnesthesia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: Chronic bronchitis (CB), a chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) phenotype defined by persistent mucus hypersecretion and cough, is associated with poor quality of life, exacerbations, and lung function impairment. Bronchial Rheoplasty (BR) delivers non-thermal pulsed electric fields to airway epithelium and submucosa. Preliminary studies demonstrated reduced airway goblet cell hyperplasia and symptom improvement in response to BR. This study aimed to further assess the safety and clinical feasibility of BR in the setting of CB. Patients and Methods: This 3-center, single-arm study evaluated the safety and feasibility of BR in Canadian patients. The major inclusion criteria were the sum of CAT first 2 questions (cough and mucus) ≥ 7 out of 10 and FEV 1 ≥ 30% predicted. Right-sided airways were treated first; left, 1 month later. Serious adverse events (SAEs) were tabulated through 12 months. Outcomes were evaluated using the SGRQ and CAT. Results: Ten patients with CB were enrolled and followed for 12 months. The BR procedure was successful in all patients (mean age 69 ± 5.8 years, post-BD FEV 1 77.1 ± 28.3, SGRQ 56.2 ± 8.8, CAT 25.4 ± 4.7). Only one SAE, a COPD exacerbation 13 days following the BR procedure, was considered device related. No additional SAEs occurred through 12 months, and 90% of the patients were CAT responders (≥ 2-point improvement) at 3 and 6 months. Similar results were observed in SGRQ. Conclusion: BR was safe and well-tolerated. Meaningful symptom improvement was observed through 12 months, suggesting BR may be a viable treatment option for patients with CB. Keywords: chronic bronchitis, COPD, bronchoscopy, pulsed electric fields

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.503
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.291 · 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.

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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of COPDSame topicTracheal and airway disordersFrench-language works237,207