MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414257310 · doi:10.1186/s40635-025-00799-9

Total liquid ventilation in a porcine model of severe acute respiratory distress syndrome using a new generation of liquid ventilator

2025· article· en· W4414257310 on OpenAlexaff
Naoto Watanabe, Antoine Bois, Fanny Lidouren, Yara Abi Zeid Daou, Ali Jendoubi, Baptiste Gaborieau, Mathéo Richard, Mathieu Nadeau, Fabrice Paublant, Mickaël Libardi, Sandrine Perrotto, Bijan Ghaleh, Étienne Fortin‐Pellerin, Philippe Micheau, Patrick Bruneval, Matthias Kohlhauer, Jean-Damien Ricard, Renaud Tissier

Bibliographic record

VenueIntensive Care Medicine Experimental · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRespiratory Support and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersAgence Nationale de la Recherche
KeywordsAcute respiratory distressRespiratory distressVentilation (architecture)Mechanical ventilationLiquid liquidRespiratory system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Total liquid ventilation (TLV) has been experimentally proposed as an alternative treatment for the management of Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS). Recent technological advances have led to the evaluation of a TLV prototype in patients resuscitated after cardiac arrest. Here, our goal was to determine whether a derived version of this prototype, so-called LV4B ( liquid ventilation for breathing ), could be used for normothermic TLV in a swine model of severe ARDS. Methods Swine were anesthetized and instrumented for respiratory and hemodynamic evaluation. ARDS was induced by one or two administrations of oleic acid (0.1 mg/kg), until reaching a PaO2/FiO2 ratio < 100 mmHg. After ARDS induction, animals were allocated to undergo 60 min of either gas ventilation continuation (Control group) or TLV using a prototype that continuously controls respiratory rate (RR), liquid tidal volume (LqVt) and end-expiratory liquid volume (EELqV, respectively). Perfluorooctyl bromide was used as breathable liquid. Results After ARDS induction and group allocation, 2/5 animals (40%) survived in the Control groups versus 5/5 in the TLV group (100%). In the Control group, premature deaths were related to sustained hypoxemia (PaO 2 < 50 mmHg) with hemodynamic failure. Surviving animals presented a trend toward better oxygenation in TLV versus Control, without achieving statistical significance due to the low number of survivors in the Control group. PaCO 2 , blood pH, lactate levels, or pulmonary and systemic hemodynamics were not different between groups in survivors. In the TLV group, the average LqVt, EELqV, and respiratory rate (RR) were 12.6 ± 0.4 mL/kg, 22.9 ± 2.9 mL/kg, and 5.3 ± 0.5 breath/min (mean ± SEM) at the end of the procedure, respectively. In all animals, pulmonary debris were washed out from the lung and collected by the TLV device throughout the procedure. After necropsy, histopathological examination demonstrated a significantly lower extent of inflammatory and congestion lesions in TLV versus Control. Conclusions TLV with a liquid ventilator controlling EELqV, RR and LqVt is feasible and safe in large animals in a severe model of ARDS. This opens promising perspectives and warrants further investigation, including prolonged treatment durations and long-term follow-up.

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 score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.965

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.345
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 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIntensive Care Medicine ExperimentalSame topicRespiratory Support and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207