Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34429449›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2021

Evaluation of a mechanical lung model to test small animal whole body plethysmography.

Swen Hülsmann, Amara Khan, Liya Hagos, Martin Hindermann, Torsten Nägel, Christian Dullin

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 22% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Establishment of a Mouse Model ofMicroorganisms · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Frontiers in medicine · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Swen HülsmannClinic for Anesthesiology, University Medical Center, Göttingen, Germany. shuelsm2@uni-goettingen.de.
Amara KhanDepartment of Translational Molecular Imaging, Max-Plank-Institute of Experimental Medicine, Göttingen, Germany.
Liya HagosClinic for Anesthesiology, University Medical Center, Göttingen, Germany.
Martin HindermannDepartment of Clinical Neuroscience, Max-Plank-Institute of Experimental Medicine, Göttingen, Germany.
Torsten NägelInstitute of Neuro- and Sensory Physiology, University Medical Center, Göttingen, Germany.
Christian DullinInstitute for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Medical Center, Göttingen, Germany.
Universitätsmedizin Göttingen · DEMax Planck Institute of Experimental Medicine · DEElettra-Sincrotrone Trieste S.C.p.A. · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Whole-body plethysmography (WBP) is an established method to determine physiological parameters and pathophysiological alteration of breathing in animals and animal models of a variety of diseases. Although frequently used, there is ongoing debate about what exactly is measured by whole-body-plethysmography and how reliable the data derived from this method are. Here, we designed an artificial lung model that enables a thorough evaluation of different predictions about and around whole-body plethysmography. Using our lung model, we confirmed that during WBP two components contribute to the pressure changes detected in the chamber: (1) the increase in the pressure due to heating and moistening of the air during inspiration, termed conditioning; (2) changes in the chamber pressure that depend on airway resistance. Both components overlap and contribute to the temporal pressure-profile measured in the chamber or across the wall of the chamber, respectively. Our data showed that a precise measurement of the breathing volume appears to be hindered by at least two factors: (1) the unknown relative contribution of each of these two components; (2) not only the air in the inspired volume is conditioned during inspiration, but also air within the residual volume and dead space that is recruited during inspiration. Moreover, our data suggest that the expiratory negative pressure peak that is used to determine the enhanced pause (Penh) parameter is not a measure for airway resistance as such but rather a consequence of the animal's response to the airway resistance, using forced or active expiration to overcome the resistance by a higher thoracic pressure.

Indexed as

Ventilators, MechanicalAnimalsLungMaleMiceMice, Inbred C57BLPlethysmographyRespiration, Artificial

Identifiers

PMID34429449
PMCPMC8384843
OpenAlexW3193465779

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.