MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406430344 · doi:10.1186/s13054-025-05264-3

Distribution of airway pressure opening in the lungs measured with electrical impedance tomography (POET): a prospective physiological study

2025· article· en· W4406430344 on OpenAlexafffund
Nannan Sun, C. Brault, Antenor Rodrigues, Matthew Ko, Fernando Nataniel Vieira, Vorakamol Phoophiboon, Michel Slama, Lü Chen, Laurent Brochard

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Care · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRespiratory Support and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsMuscular Dystrophy CanadaUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineElectrical impedance tomographyAirwayComputed tomographyTomographyProspective cohort studyEmergency medicineIntensive care medicineRadiologyInternal medicineAnesthesia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background In patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF) under mechanical ventilation, the change in pressure slope during a low-flow insufflation indicates a global airway opening pressure (AOP) needed to reopen closed airways and may be used for titration of positive end-expiratory pressure. Objectives To understand 1) if airways open homogeneously inside the lungs or significant regional AOP variations exist; 2) whether the pattern of the pressure slope change during low-flow insufflation can indicate the presence of regional AOP variations. Methods Using electrical impedance tomography, we recorded low-flow insufflation maneuvers (< 10 L/min) starting from end-expiratory positive pressure 0–5 cmH 2 O. We measured global (AOP global ) and regional AOPs from pressure-impedance curves in the four different lung quadrants, and compared AOP global with the highest quadrantal AOP (AOP highest ). We categorized the slope change of the low-flow inflation pressure–time curve into three patterns: no change, progressive change, abrupt change. Results Among the 36 patients analyzed, 9 (25%) had AOP global ≥ 5 cmH 2 O whereas 19 (53%) exhibited regional AOP highest ≥ 5 cmH 2 O. AOP global was on average similar to AOP of the upper right quadrant ( P = 0.182) but was lower than AOPs of the other three quadrants ( P < 0.01 of each). AOP global was significantly lower than AOP highest : 3.0 [2.0–4.3] vs. 5.0 [2.8–8.3] cmH 2 O, P < 0.001. AOP was higher in the dependent than the non-dependent ventilated lung (4.0 [2.0–6.3] vs . 3.0 [2.0–5.0] cmH 2 O, P < 0.001). Seventeen (47%) patients exhibited a ‘progressive change’ pattern in the pressure–time curve. These patients had a larger difference between AOP highest and AOP global (3.0 [2.0–4.0] cmH 2 O with a maximum of 8 cmH 2 O) compared to the other two patterns: 1.0 [0–1.0] cmH 2 O in ‘no change’ , P < 0.001 and 1.0 [0–2.0] cmH 2 O in ‘abrupt change’ , P = 0.003. Conclusion AOP global mostly reflects the lowest opening pressure in the lung and frequently underestimates the highest regional AOP in mechanically ventilated patients with AHRF. A progressive slope change during the low-flow pressure–time curve indicates the presence of several and higher regional AOPs. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT 05825534 (registered, April 24th, 2023), retrospectively registered. Graphical abstract

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)0.003
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 score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.300 · 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

Citations6
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical CareSame topicRespiratory Support and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207