A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Effect of positive end-expiratory pressure on functional residual capacity in two experimental models of acute respiratory distress syndrome. | LitMetric

AI Article Synopsis

  • - The study aimed to assess whether changes in positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) affect functional residual capacity (FRC) in models of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) using passive spirometry.
  • - In a randomized crossover study with 12 pigs, two types of ARDS (pulmonary and extra-pulmonary) were induced, and two PEEP levels (low and high) were tested, measuring FRC and recruitment volume.
  • - Results showed that FRC remained unchanged with different PEEP levels in both ARDS models, indicating that PEEP does not influence FRC in this context.

Article Abstract

Objective: Measurement of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP)-induced recruitment lung volume using passive spirometry is based on the assumption that the functional residual capacity (FRC) is not modified by the PEEP changes. We aimed to investigate the influence of PEEP on FRC in different models of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS).

Methods: A randomized crossover study was performed in 12 pigs. Pulmonary (n = 6) and extra-pulmonary (n = 6) ARDS models were established using an alveolar instillation of hydrochloric acid and a right atrium injection of oleic acid, respectively. Low (5 cmHO) and high (15 cmHO) PEEP were randomly applied in each animal. FRC and recruitment volume were determined using the nitrogen wash-in/wash-out technique and release maneuver.

Results: FRC was not significantly different between the two PEEP levels in either pulmonary ARDS (299 ± 92 mL and 309 ± 130 mL at 5 and 15 cmHO, respectively) or extra-pulmonary ARDS (305 ± 143 mL and 328 ± 197 mL at 5 and 15 cmHO, respectively). The recruitment volume was not significantly different between the two models (pulmonary, 341 ± 100 mL; extra-pulmonary, 351 ± 170 mL).

Conclusions: PEEP did not influence FRC in either the pulmonary or extra-pulmonary ARDS pig model.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7294389PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0300060520920426DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

positive end-expiratory
8
end-expiratory pressure
8
functional residual
8
residual capacity
8
models acute
8
acute respiratory
8
respiratory distress
8
distress syndrome
8
recruitment volume
8
extra-pulmonary ards
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!