ArticleIntensive care medicine experimental2018
Fully automated life support: an implementation and feasibility pilot study in healthy pigs.
Article in Intensive care medicine experimental, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- MAN VERSUS MACHINE: PROVIDER DIRECTED VERSUS PRECISION AUTOMATED CRITICAL CARE MANAGEMENT IN A PORCINE MODEL OF DISTRIBUTIVE SHOCK.Shock (Augusta, Ga.) · 2024Article
- An Automated Hardware-in-Loop Testbed for Evaluating Hemorrhagic Shock Resuscitation Controllers.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Closed-Loop Controlled Fluid Administration Systems: A Comprehensive Scoping Review.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Article
- Automated closed-loop management of body temperature using forced-air blankets: preliminary feasibility study in a porcine model.BMC anesthesiology · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAutomated systems are available in various application areas all over the world for the purpose of reducing workload and increasing safety. However, such support systems that would aid caregivers are still lacking in the medical sector. With respect to workload and safety, especially, the intensive care unit appears to be an important and challenging application field. Whereas many closed-loop subsystems for single applications already exist, no comprehensive system covering multiple therapeutic aspects and interactions is available yet. This paper describes a fully closed-loop intensive care therapy and presents a feasibility analysis performed in three healthy pigs over a period of 72 h each to demonstrate the technical and practical implementation of automated intensive care therapy.
methodsThe study was performed in three healthy, female German Landrace pigs under general anesthesia with endotracheal intubation. An arterial and a central venous line were implemented, and a suprapubic urinary catheter was inserted. Electrolytes, glucose levels, acid-base balance, and respiratory management were completely controlled by an automated fuzzy logic system based on individual targets. Fluid management by adaption of the respective infusion rates for the individual parameters was included.
resultsDuring the study, no manual modification of the device settings was allowed or required. Homoeostasis in all animals was kept stable during the entire observation period. All remote-controlled parameters were maintained within physiological ranges for most of the time (free arterial calcium 73%, glucose 98%, arterial base excess 89%, and etCO
conclusionsIn the presented study, we demonstrate the feasibility of a fully closed-loop system, for which we collected high-resolution data on the interaction and response of the different subsystems. Further studies should use big data approaches to analyze and investigate the interactions between the subsystems in more detail.
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.