Characteristics of lung resistance and elastance associated with tracheal stenosis and intrapulmonary airway narrowing in ex vivo sheep lungs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Understanding the characteristics of pulmonary resistance and elastance in relation to the location of airway narrowing, e.g., tracheal stenosis vs. intrapulmonary airway obstruction, will help us understand lung function characteristics and mechanisms related to different airway diseases. Methods In this study, we used ex vivo sheep lungs as a model to measure lung resistance and elastance across a range of transpulmonary pressures (5–30 cmH 2 O) and ventilation frequencies (0.125–2 Hz). We established two tracheal stenosis models by inserting plastic tubes into the tracheas, representing mild (71.8% lumen area reduction) and severe (92.1%) obstructions. For intrapulmonary airway obstruction, we induced airway narrowing by challenging the lung with acetylcholine (ACh). Results We found a pattern change in the lung resistance and apparent lung elastance as functions of ventilation frequency that depended on the transpulmonary pressure (or lung volume). At a transpulmonary pressure of 10 cmH 2 O, lung resistance increased with ventilation frequency in severe tracheal stenosis, whereas in ACh-induced airway narrowing the opposite occurred. Furthermore, apparent lung elastance at 10 cmH 2 O decreased with increasing ventilation frequency in severe tracheal stenosis whereas in ACh-induced airway narrowing the opposite occurred. Flow-volume analysis revealed that the flow amplitude was much sensitive to ventilation frequency in tracheal stenosis than it was in ACh induced airway constriction. Conclusions Results from this study suggest that lung resistance and apparent elastance measured at 10 cmH 2 O over the frequency range of 0.125-2 Hz can differentiate tracheal stenosis vs. intrapulmonary airway narrowing in ex vivo sheep lungs.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".