ArticleScientific reports2024
Breath-by-breath comparison of a novel percutaneous phrenic nerve stimulation approach with mechanical ventilation in juvenile pigs: a pilot study.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. 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.
- Muscle anisotropy influences the phrenic nerve activation threshold in non-invasive electrical stimulation.Medical & biological engineering & computing · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
About one in three critically ill patients requires mechanical ventilation (MV). Prolonged MV, however, results in diaphragmatic weakness, which itself is associated with delayed weaning and increased mortality. Inducing active diaphragmatic contraction via electrical phrenic nerve stimulation (PNS) not only provides the potential to reduce diaphragmatic muscular atrophy but also generates physiological-like ventilation and therefore offers a promising alternative to MV. Reasons why PNS is not yet used in critical care medicine are high procedural invasiveness, insufficient evidence, and lack of side-by-side comparison to MV. This study aims to establish a minimal-invasive percutaneous, bilateral electrode placement approach for sole PNS breathing and thereby enable, for the first time, a breath-by-breath comparison to MV. Six juvenile German Landrace pigs received general anesthesia and orotracheal intubation. Following the novel ultrasound-guided, landmark-based, 4-step approach, two echogenic needles per phrenic nerve were successfully placed. Stimulation effectiveness was evaluated measuring tidal volume, diaphragmatic thickening and tomographic electrical impedance in a breath-by-breath comparison to MV. Following sufficient bilateral phrenic nerve stimulation in all pigs, PNS breaths showed a 2.2-fold increase in diaphragmatic thickening. It induced tidal volumes in the lung-protective range by negative pressure inspiration and improved dorso-caudal regional ventilation in contrast to MV. Our study demonstrated the feasibility of a novel ultrasound-guided, percutaneous phrenic nerve stimulation approach, which generated sufficient tidal volumes and showed more resemblance to physiological breathing than MV in a breath-by-breath comparison.
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.