ArticlePloS one2022
Biological evaluation of a mechanical ventilator that operates by controlling an automated manual resuscitator. A descriptive study in swine.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
- Performance assessment of a ventilator developed for emergency use in a resource-constrained ICU setting during the COVID-19 pandemic.Biomedical engineering online · 2025Article
- COVID-19 Lessons Learned: Response to the Anticipated Ventilator Shortage.Respiratory care · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Covid-19 outbreak challenged health systems around the world to design and implement cost-effective devices produced locally to meet the increased demand of mechanical ventilators worldwide. This study evaluates the physiological responses of healthy swine maintained under volume- or pressure-controlled mechanical ventilation by a mechanical ventilator implemented to bring life-support by automating a resuscitation bag and closely controlling ventilatory parameters. Physiological parameters were monitored in eight sedated animals (t0) prior to inducing deep anaesthesia, and during the next six hours of mechanical ventilation (t1-7). Hemodynamic conditions were monitored periodically using a portable gas analyser machine (i.e. BEecf, carbonate, SaO2, lactate, pH, PaO2, PaCO2) and a capnometer (i.e. ETCO2). Electrocardiogram, echocardiography and lung ultrasonography were performed to detect in vivo alterations in these vital organs and pathological findings from necropsy were reported. The mechanical ventilator properly controlled physiological levels of blood biochemistry such as oxygenation parameters (PaO2, PaCO2, SaO2, ETCO2), acid-base equilibrium (pH, carbonate, BEecf), and perfusion of tissues (lactate levels). In addition, histopathological analysis showed no evidence of acute tissue damage in lung, heart, liver, kidney, or brain. All animals were able to breathe spontaneously after undergoing mechanical ventilation. These preclinical data, supports the biological safety of the medical device to move forward to further evaluation in clinical studies.
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.