MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4415006768 · doi:10.1101/2025.10.07.25337536

Cardiopulmonary resuscitation with Synchronized Ventilation: A new technique of Neonatal Resuscitation that reduces time to return of spontaneous circulation in a neonatal porcine model

2025· preprint· en· W4415006768 on OpenAlexafffund
Megan O’Reilly, Raza Hyderi, Tze-Fun Lee, Marwa Ramsie, Georg M. Schmölzer

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Arrest and Resuscitation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersUniversity of AlbertaWomen and Children's Health Research InstituteChildren's Health Research Institute
KeywordsReturn of spontaneous circulationCardiopulmonary resuscitationNeonatal resuscitationAsphyxiaVentilation (architecture)ResuscitationPerinatal asphyxia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction Current neonatal resuscitation guidelines recommend a 3:1 Compression:Ventilation ratio (3:1 C:V) during cardiopulmonary resuscitation. One of the concerns with 3:1 C:V is lung derecruitment, which contributes to a delay in achieving return to spontaneous circulation (ROSC). An alternative approach might be chest compression synchronized ventilation (CCSV), which delivers a ventilation with each chest compression thereby achieving lung recruitment. We hypothesized that in asphyxiated newborn piglets with cardiac arrest CCSV vs 3:1 C:V would decrease the time to ROSC. Methods Newborn piglets were anesthetized, intubated, instrumented, and exposed to 45-minute normocapnic hypoxia, followed by asphyxia. Piglets were randomized to either CCSV or 3:1 C:V. Piglets assigned to CCSV received 120 compressions/min with a ventilator-synchronized inflation delivered during every compression (CCSV-Mode, Weinmann Germany). In the 3:1 C:V group, piglets received 90 compressions/min and 30 ventilations/min. Compressions and ventilations were continued until ROSC. Continuous respiratory parameters, cardiac output, mean systemic artery pressures, and blood flows were measured. Results Sixteen neonatal mixed breed pigs (1-3 days of age, weighing 1.8-2.3kg) and were randomly assigned to CCSV or 3:1 C:V. The median (IQR) asphyxia time was not significantly different between CCSV (326 (275-405)sec) and 3:1 C:V (416 (266-475)sec) (p=0.442). Time to ROSC was significantly lower using CCSV with 68 (50-125)sec vs 170 (105-312)sec with 3:1 C:V (p=0.030). Rate of ROSC was 6/8 with CCSV and 5/8 with 3:1 C:V (p=1.000). Conclusions In a neonatal piglet model of asystolic cardiac arrest, CCSV resulted in a significantly faster time to ROSC compared to 3:1 C:V. Using CCSV might be an alternative to 3:1 C:V for neonatal resuscitation, but further studies are warranted.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxiv→Same topicCardiac Arrest and Resuscitation→French-language works237,207→