ArticleRespiratory research2016
Variable ventilation improves pulmonary function and reduces lung damage without increasing bacterial translocation in a rat model of experimental pneumonia.
Article in Respiratory research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Functional Amyloids in Pseudomonas aeruginosa Are Essential for the Proteome Modulation That Leads to Pathoadaptation in Pulmonary Niches.Microbiology spectrum · 2023Article
- Analysis of pathogens and risk factors of secondary pulmonary infection in patients with COVID-19.Microbial pathogenesis · 2021Article
- Impact of positive biphasic pressure during low and high inspiratory efforts in Pseudomonas aeruginosa-induced pneumonia.PloS one · 2021Article
- Physiologically variable ventilation reduces regional lung inflammation in a pediatric model of acute respiratory distress syndrome.Respiratory research · 2020Article
- Periodic Fluctuation of Tidal Volumes Further Improves Variable Ventilation in Experimental Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome.Frontiers in physiology · 2018Article
- Variability in Tidal Volume Affects Lung and Cardiovascular Function Differentially in a Rat Model of Experimental Emphysema.Frontiers in physiology · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
21 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVariable ventilation has been shown to improve pulmonary function and reduce lung damage in different models of acute respiratory distress syndrome. Nevertheless, variable ventilation has not been tested during pneumonia. Theoretically, periodic increases in tidal volume (V
methodsThirty-two Wistar rats were randomly assigned to receive intratracheal of Pseudomonas aeruginosa (PA) or saline (SAL) (n = 16/group). After 24-h, animals were anesthetized and ventilated for 2 h with either conventional volume-controlled (VCV) or variable volume-controlled ventilation (VV), with mean V
resultsIn both SAL and PA, VV improved oxygenation and lung elastance compared to VCV. In SAL, VV decreased interleukin (IL)-6 expression compared to VCV (median [interquartile range]: 1.3 [0.3-2.3] vs. 5.3 [3.6-7.0]; p = 0.02) and increased surfactant protein-D expression compared to NV (2.5 [1.9-3.5] vs. 1.2 [0.8-1.2]; p = 0.0005). In PA, compared to VCV, VV reduced perivascular edema (2.5 [2.0-3.75] vs. 6.0 [4.5-6.0]; p < 0.0001), septum neutrophils (2.0 [1.0-4.0] vs. 5.0 [3.3-6.0]; p = 0.0008), necrotizing vasculitis (3.0 [2.0-5.5] vs. 6.0 [6.0-6.0]; p = 0.0003), and ultrastructural lung damage scores (16 [14-17] vs. 24 [14-27], p < 0.0001). Blood colony-forming-unit (CFU) counts were comparable (7 [0-28] vs. 6 [0-26], p = 0.77). Compared to NV, VCV, but not VV, increased expression amphiregulin, IL-6, and cytokine-induced neutrophil chemoattractant (CINC)-1 (2.1 [1.6-2.5] vs. 0.9 [0.7-1.2], p = 0.025; 12.3 [7.9-22.0] vs. 0.8 [0.6-1.9], p = 0.006; and 4.4 [2.9-5.6] vs. 0.9 [0.8-1.4], p = 0.003, respectively). Angiopoietin-2 expression was lower in VV compared to NV animals (0.5 [0.3-0.8] vs. 1.3 [1.0-1.5], p = 0.01).
conclusionIn this rat model of pneumonia, VV improved pulmonary function and reduced lung damage as compared to VCV, without increasing bacterial translocation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.