ArticleYonago acta medica2020
Marathoners' Breathing Pattern Protects Against Lung Injury by Mechanical Ventilation: An Ex Vivo Study Using Rabbit Lungs.
Article in Yonago acta medica, 2020. 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.
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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBreathing during a marathon is often empirically conducted in a so-called "2:2 breathing rhythm," which is based on a four-phase cycle, consisting of the 1st and 2nd inspiratory and the 1st and 2nd expiratory phases. We developed a prototype ventilator that can perform intermittent positive pressure ventilation, mimicking the breathing cycle of the 2:2 breathing rhythm. This mode of ventilation was named the marathoners' breathing rhythm ventilation (MBV). We hypothesized that MBV may have a lung protective effect.
methodsWe examined the effects of the MBV on the pulmonary pre-edema model in isolated perfused rabbit lungs. The pulmonary pre-edema state was induced using bloodless perfusate with low colloid osmotic pressure. The 14 isolated rabbit lung preparations were randomly divided into the conventional mechanical ventilation (CMV) group and MBV group, (both had an inspiratory/expiratory ratio of 1/1). In the CMV group, seven rabbit lungs were ventilated using the Harvard Ventilator 683 with a tidal volume (TV) of 8 mL/kg, a respiratory rate (RR) of 30 cycles/min, and a positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) of 2 cmH
resultsPeak airway pressure and lung wet-to-dry ratio after 60 min of ventilation were lower in the MBV group than in the CMV group.
conclusionMBV was considered to have a lung-protective effect compared to CMV.
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.