Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35239740›Full record

ArticlePloS one2022

Biological evaluation of a mechanical ventilator that operates by controlling an automated manual resuscitator. A descriptive study in swine.

Maryanne Melanie Gonzales Carazas, Cesar Miguel Gavidia, Roberto Davila Fernandez, Juan Alberto Vargas Zuñiga, Alberto Crespo Paiva, William Bocanegra, Joan Calderon, Evelyn Sanchez, Rosa Perales, Brandon Zeña and 4 more

Open access · goldAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 92% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

14 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Maryanne Melanie Gonzales CarazasInstitute of Omics and Applied Biotechnology, Pontificia Universidad Catolica del Peru, Lima, Peru.
Cesar Miguel GavidiaSchool of Veterinary Medicine, Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos, Lima, Peru.ORCID 0000-0003-3936-5077
Roberto Davila FernandezSchool of Veterinary Medicine, Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos, Lima, Peru.
Juan Alberto Vargas ZuñigaCentro de Urgencias Veterinarias (CUVET), Lima, Peru.
Alberto Crespo PaivaInstituto Veterinario de Oftalmologia (IVO), Lima, Peru.
William BocanegraSchool of Veterinary Medicine, Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos, Lima, Peru.
Joan CalderonSchool of Veterinary Medicine, Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos, Lima, Peru.
Evelyn SanchezSchool of Veterinary Medicine, Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos, Lima, Peru.
Rosa PeralesSchool of Veterinary Medicine, Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos, Lima, Peru.
Brandon ZeñaInstituto Veterinario de Oftalmologia (IVO), Lima, Peru.
Juan Fernando Calcina IsiqueSchool of Veterinary Medicine, Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos, Lima, Peru.
Jaime ReateguiBrein, Lima, Peru.
Benjamin CastañedaInstitute of Omics and Applied Biotechnology, Pontificia Universidad Catolica del Peru, Lima, Peru.
Fanny L CasadoInstitute of Omics and Applied Biotechnology, Pontificia Universidad Catolica del Peru, Lima, Peru.ORCID 0000-0002-8791-626X
National University of San Marcos · PEPontificia Universidad Católica del Perú · PEClínica e Instituto de Oftalmologia Ivo Corrêa Meyer · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

Ventilators, MechanicalAnimalsAutomationBlood Gas AnalysisCardiopulmonary ResuscitationCOVID-19FemaleHemodynamicsMaleRespirationRespiration, ArtificialSARS-CoV-2Swine

Identifiers

PMID35239740
PMCPMC8893637
OpenAlexW3163527606

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.