ArticleVeterinary world2019
Evaluation of ventilator on lung profile of piglets (
Article in Veterinary world, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimThis study was conducted to assess the effect of ventilators on the lung profile of piglets in the hypovolemic shock before and after the excessive resuscitation of the crystalloid fluid. MATERIALS AND
methodsFive male piglets were used in this study as the models of shock, and there are four phases of treatment: Stabilization, shock of bleeding, normovolemic resuscitation, and hypervolemic resuscitation. The application of mechanical ventilation to patients who suspected of having lung injury may worsen the patient's conditions. The purpose of this study was to set the ventilator with the set of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) of 5 cm H
resultsEVLWI does not indicate pulmonary edema. A significant decrease in VTE without any significant alterations in EVLWI, PIP, and RR has indicated the shallow breathing in the shock condition. Therefore, the PVPI parameter cannot be used as a parameter for capillary permeability since its formulation does not reinforce the results of data in the shock condition. The set of the ventilator may prevent the increase of EVLWI, and the uses of ventilators do not worsen the patient's conditions during the crystalloid resuscitation.
conclusionThe use of mechanical ventilator as the support does not worsen the hypovolemic condition and is safe to use as long as the lung profile is not indicated to have lung injury.
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.