Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36082971›Full record

ArticlePhysiological reports2022

Use of a novel "Split" ventilation system in bench and porcine modeling of acute respiratory distress syndrome.

Pierce Geoghegan, Jennifer Clarke, Grace Hogan, Aoife Keogh, Hannah Marsh, Karen Donnelly, Natalie McEvoy, Aoife Doolan, Stephen F Madden, Ignacio Martin-Loeches and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Physiological reports, 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
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 35% 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, 3 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

13 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Pierce GeogheganDepartment of Anaesthesia and Critical Care, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland.
Jennifer ClarkeDepartment of Anaesthesia and Critical Care, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland.
Grace HoganDepartment of Anaesthesia and Critical Care, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland.
Aoife KeoghDepartment of Anaesthesia and Critical Care, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland.
Hannah MarshBeaumont Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.
Karen DonnellyDepartment of Anaesthesia and Critical Care, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland.
Natalie McEvoyDepartment of Anaesthesia and Critical Care, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0002-7533-166X
Aoife DoolanTallaght Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.
Stephen F MaddenData Science Centre, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland.
Ignacio Martin-LoechesDepartment of Intensive Care, St. James Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.
Michael PowerBeaumont Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.
John G LaffeyDepartment of Anaesthesia and Critical Care, Galway University Hospital, Galway, Ireland.
Gerard F CurleyDepartment of Anaesthesia and Critical Care, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0003-0271-195X
Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland · IEBeaumont Hospital · IESt. James's Hospital · IETallaght University Hospital · IEUniversity Hospital Galway · IE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Split ventilation (using a single ventilator to ventilate multiple patients) is technically feasible. However, connecting two patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and differing lung mechanics to a single ventilator is concerning. This study aimed to: (1) determine functionality of a split ventilation system in benchtop tests, (2) determine whether standard ventilation would be superior to split ventilation in a porcine model of ARDS and (3) assess usability of a split ventilation system with minimal specific training. The functionality of a split ventilation system was assessed using test lungs. The usability of the system was assessed in simulated clinical scenarios. The feasibility of the system to provide modified lung protective ventilation was assessed in a porcine model of ARDS (n = 30). In bench testing a split ventilation system independently ventilated two test lungs under conditions of varying compliance and resistance. In usability tests, a high proportion of naïve operators could assemble and use the system. In the porcine model, modified lung protective ventilation was feasible with split ventilation and produced similar respiratory mechanics, gas exchange and biomarkers of lung injury when compared to standard ventilation. Split ventilation can provide some elements of lung protective ventilation and is feasible in bench testing and an in vivo model of ARDS.

Indexed as

Respiratory Distress SyndromeAnimalsLungRespirationRespiration, ArtificialRespiratory MechanicsSwineacute lung injuryacute respiratory distress syndromelung protective ventilationsplit ventilation

Identifiers

PMID36082971
PMCPMC9461348
OpenAlexW4295048250

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.