ArticleJournal of translational medicine2021
Accuracy of the end-expiratory lung volume measured by the modified nitrogen washout/washin technique: a bench study.
Article in Journal of translational medicine, 2021. 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, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Ventricular blood T2 in asymptomatic adults at 3T: effect of age and lung volume by magnetic resonance imaging.The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2025Article
- Functional residual capacity and elastic power as prognostic markers in acute respiratory distress syndrome.American journal of translational research · 2025Article
- Effects of Lung Injury and Abdominal Insufflation on Respiratory Mechanics and Lung Volume During Time-Controlled Adaptive Ventilation.Respiratory care · 2024Article
- End-expiratory lung volumes as a potential indicator for COVID-19 associated acute respiratory distress syndrome: a retrospective study.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2024Article
- A Comparison of Proximal and Tracheal Airway Pressures During Pressure Controlled Ventilation.Respiratory care · 2023Article
- Effect of mechanical ventilation during cardiopulmonary bypass on end-expiratory lung volume in the perioperative period of cardiac surgery: an observational study.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2022Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe functional residual capacity (FRC) determines the oxygenating capacity of the lung and is heavily affected in the clinical context of the acute respiratory distress syndrome. Nitrogen-wash-in/wash-out methods have been used to measure FRC. These methods have rarely been validated against exactly known volumes. The aim of the study was to assess the accuracy and precision of the N
methodsWe conducted a diagnostic bench study in the Intensive Care Unit and Radiology Department of a tertiary hospital in Switzerland. Using a fully controllable high fidelity lung simulator (TestChest®), we set the functional residual capacity at 1500 ml, 2000 ml and 2500 ml and connected to the GE Carestation respirator, which includes the nitrogen washout/washin technique (INview™ tool). FRC was then set to vary by different levels of PEEP (5, 8, 12 and 15 cmH
resultsOne hundred and thirty-five nitrogen-wash-in/wash-out measurements were taken at three levels of F
conclusionsWe conclude that the TestChest® simulator is an accurate simulation tool, concerning the simulation of lung volumes. The nitrogen wash-in/wash out method correlated positively with FRC changes, despite a relatively large bias in absolute measurements. The reference volumes in the lung simulator verified with CT volumetry were very close to their expected values. The reason for the bias could not be determined.
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.