ArticleFrontiers in pediatrics2022
Positive end expiratory pressure and respiratory system resistance between self-inflating bag and T-piece resuscitator in a cadaveric piglet lung model.
Article in Frontiers in pediatrics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Respiratory metrics of neonatal positive pressure ventilation on different ventilatory rates: A simulation study.Resuscitation plus · 2025Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: In neonatal resuscitation, T-piece resuscitator (TPR) are used widely, but the evidence is limited for their use in infants born at term gestation. The aim of this study was to compare the delivered positive end expiratory pressure (PEEP) and respiratory system resistance ( Methods: Cadaveric newborn piglets were tracheotomised, intubated (cuffed tube) and leak tested. Static lung compliance was measured. Positive pressure ventilation was applied by TPR and SIB in a randomized sequence with varying, inflations per minute (40, 60 and 80 min) and peak inspiratory pressures (18 and 30 cmH Results: The mean difference in PEEP (TPR vs. SIB) was statistically significant at higher inflation rates of 60 and 80 bpm. At normal lung compliance, mean difference was 1.231 ( Conclusion: TPR is associated with significantly higher PEEP in a compliant lung model, which is probably related to the resistance of the TPR circuit. The effect of inadvertent PEEP on lung mechanics and hemodynamics need to be examined in humans. Further studies are needed to assess devices used to provide PEEP (TPR, SIB with PEEP valve, Anaesthetic bag with flow valve) during resuscitation of the newborn.
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.