MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405374705 · doi:10.1186/s40635-024-00703-x

Safety of flow-controlled ventilation with positive and negative end-expiratory pressure in a swine model of intracranial hypertension

2024· article· en· W4405374705 on OpenAlexaff
Álmos Schranc, J. Scott Daniels, Roberta Südy, Fabienne Fontao, Philippe Bijlenga, Guillaume Plourde, Hervé Quintard

Bibliographic record

VenueIntensive Care Medicine Experimental · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular Disturbances
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
FundersUniversité de Genève
KeywordsMedicinePositive end-expiratory pressureVentilation (architecture)AnesthesiaIntracranial pressureOxygenationCerebral perfusion pressureMechanical ventilationHemodynamicsMean arterial pressureCerebral blood flowCardiologyInternal medicineBlood pressureHeart rate

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Patients with brain damage often require mechanical ventilation. Although lung-protective ventilation is recommended, the application of increased positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) has been associated with elevated intracranial pressure (ICP) due to altered cerebral venous return. This study investigates the effects of flow-controlled ventilation (FCV) using negative end-expiratory pressures (NEEP), on cerebral hemodynamics in a swine model of intracranial hypertension. Methods A model of intracranial hypertension involving bilateral trepan bolt holes was performed in 14 pigs. Pressure-controlled volume-guaranteed ventilation (PCV-VG) with PEEP and FCV using PEEP and then NEEP were applied. Intracranial pressure and oxygenation, as well as systemic hemodynamics and gas exchange parameters, were continuously monitored. Data were collected at baseline and at varying PEEP levels for both PCV-VG and FCV ventilation modalities. Following this, FCV ventilation and NEEP levels of -3, -6 and -9 cmH 2 O were applied. Results ICP remained stable with low PEEP levels, but significantly decreased with NEEP. Lower ICP following NEEP improved cerebral perfusion pressure and cerebral tissue oxygenation ( p < 0.05 for all). FCV with NEEP at EEP-6 and EEP-9 significantly improved cardiac output and mean arterial pressure (MAP), compared to PCV-VG and FCV using PEEP ( p < 0.05, respectively). There were no significant differences in gas exchange parameters between modalities (PCV-VG vs FCV), and between the application of PEEP or NEEP. No significant correlations were observed between ΔICP and ΔMAP. Conclusion The application of FCV with NEEP appears to be a safe ventilation mode and offers an additional tool for controlling severe intracranial pressure episodes. These findings warrant validation in future studies and may lead to important potential applications in clinical practice.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.156
Threshold uncertainty score0.544

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIntensive Care Medicine ExperimentalSame topicTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular DisturbancesFrench-language works237,207