Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39768114›Full record

ArticleBioengineering (Basel, Switzerland)2024

In Vivo Evaluation of Two Hemorrhagic Shock Resuscitation Controllers with Non-Invasive, Intermittent Sensors.

Tina M Rodgers, David Berard, Jose M Gonzalez, Saul J Vega, Rachel Gathright, Carlos Bedolla, Evan Ross, Eric J Snider

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

8 authors.

Tina M RodgersOrgan Support and Automation Technologies Group, U.S. Army Institute of Surgical Research, JBSA Fort Sam Houston, San Antonio, TX 78234, USA.
David BerardOrgan Support and Automation Technologies Group, U.S. Army Institute of Surgical Research, JBSA Fort Sam Houston, San Antonio, TX 78234, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-2286-3846
Jose M GonzalezOrgan Support and Automation Technologies Group, U.S. Army Institute of Surgical Research, JBSA Fort Sam Houston, San Antonio, TX 78234, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-4325-409X
Saul J VegaOrgan Support and Automation Technologies Group, U.S. Army Institute of Surgical Research, JBSA Fort Sam Houston, San Antonio, TX 78234, USA.
Rachel GathrightOrgan Support and Automation Technologies Group, U.S. Army Institute of Surgical Research, JBSA Fort Sam Houston, San Antonio, TX 78234, USA.
Carlos BedollaOrgan Support and Automation Technologies Group, U.S. Army Institute of Surgical Research, JBSA Fort Sam Houston, San Antonio, TX 78234, USA.
Evan RossOrgan Support and Automation Technologies Group, U.S. Army Institute of Surgical Research, JBSA Fort Sam Houston, San Antonio, TX 78234, USA.
Eric J SniderOrgan Support and Automation Technologies Group, U.S. Army Institute of Surgical Research, JBSA Fort Sam Houston, San Antonio, TX 78234, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-0293-4937

Funding

Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education NAUnited States Department of Defense CO230029United States Department of Defense IS220008
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Hemorrhage is a leading cause of preventable death in military and civilian trauma medicine. Fluid resuscitation is the primary treatment option, which can be difficult to manage when multiple patients are involved. Traditional vital signs needed to drive resuscitation therapy being unavailable without invasive catheter placement is a challenge. To overcome these obstacles, we propose using closed-loop fluid resuscitation controllers managed by non-invasive, intermittent signal sensor inputs to simplify their use in far-forward environments. Using non-invasive, intermittent sensor controllers will allow quicker medical intervention due to negating the need for an arterial catheter to be placed for pressure-guided fluid resuscitation. Two controller designs were evaluated in a swine hemorrhagic shock injury model, with each controller only receiving non-invasive blood pressure (NIBP) measurements simulated from invasive input signals every 60 s. We found that both physiological closed-loop controllers were able to effectively resuscitate subjects out of life-threatening hemorrhagic shock using only intermittent data inputs with a resuscitation effectiveness of at least 95% for each respective controller. We also compared this intermittent signal input to a NIBP cuff and to a deep learning model that predicts blood pressure from a photoplethysmography waveform. Each approach showed evidence of tracking blood pressure, but more effort is needed to refine these non-invasive input approaches. We conclude that resuscitation controllers hold promise to one day be capable of non-invasive sensor input while retaining their effectiveness, expanding their utility for managing patients during mass casualty or battlefield conditions.

Indexed as

animal studyclosed loopcontrollerhemorrhagemachine learningnon-invasivephotoplethysmographyresuscitation

Identifiers

PMID39768114
PMCPMC11727294

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.