↓ Skip to main content

Effect of PEEP on breath sound power spectra in experimental lung injury

Overview of attention for article published in Intensive Care Medicine Experimental, October 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
5 Mendeley
Title
Effect of PEEP on breath sound power spectra in experimental lung injury
Published in
Intensive Care Medicine Experimental, October 2014
DOI 10.1186/s40635-014-0025-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jukka Räsänen, Michael E Nemergut, Noam Gavriely

Abstract

Acute lung injury (ALI) is known to be associated with the emergence of inspiratory crackles and enhanced transmission of artificial sounds from the airway opening to the chest wall. Recently, we described the effect of ALI on the basic flow-induced breath sounds, separated from the crackles. In this study, we investigated the effects of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) on these noncrackling basic lung sounds augmented during ALI. Lung sounds were recorded in six anesthetized, intubated, and mechanically ventilated pigs at three locations bilaterally on the chest wall. Recordings were obtained before and after induction of lung injury with oleic acid and during application of incremental positive end-expiratory pressure. Oleic acid injections caused severe pulmonary edema predominately in the dependent-lung regions. Inspiratory spectral power of breath sounds increased in all lung regions over a frequency band from 150 to 1,200 Hz, with further power augmentation in dependent-lung areas at higher frequencies. Incremental positive end-expiratory pressure reversed the spectral power augmentation seen with ALI, reducing it to pre-injury levels with PEEP of 10 and 15 cmH2O in all lung regions at all frequencies. The application of positive end-expiratory pressure to normal lungs attenuated spectral power slightly and only over a band from 150 to 1,200 Hz. We confirm a gravity-related spectral amplitude increase of basic flow-induced breath sounds recorded over lung regions affected by permeability-type pulmonary edema and show that such changes are reversible by alveolar recruitment with PEEP.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 5 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 5 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 2 40%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 20%
Professor 1 20%
Unknown 1 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 3 60%
Social Sciences 1 20%
Unknown 1 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 October 2015.
All research outputs
#18,429,163
of 22,830,751 outputs
Outputs from Intensive Care Medicine Experimental
#322
of 446 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#182,777
of 255,934 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Intensive Care Medicine Experimental
#4
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,830,751 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 446 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 255,934 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.