Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 258

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 25 of the 25 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Esophageal Manometry and Regional Transpulmonary Pressure in Lung Injury

Yoshida, Takeshi, Amato, Marcelo B. P., Grieco, Domenico Luca, Chen, Lu, Lima, Cristhiano A. S., Roldan, Rollin, Morais, Caio C. A., Gomes, Susimeire, Costa, Eduardo L. V., Cardoso, Paulo F. G., Charbonney, Emmanuel, Richard, Jean-Christophe M., Brochard, Laurent, Kavanagh, Brian P.·2018·American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine

Abstract

RATIONALE: Esophageal manometry is the clinically available method to estimate pleural pressure, thus enabling calculation of transpulmonary pressure (Pl). However, many concerns make it uncertain in which lung region esophageal manometry reflects local Pl. OBJECTIVES: To determine the accuracy of esophageal pressure (Pes) and in which regions esophageal manometry reflects pleural pressure (Ppl) and Pl; to assess whether lung stress in nondependent regions can be estimated at end-inspiration from Pl. METHODS: In lung-injured pigs (n = 6) and human cadavers (n = 3), Pes was measured across a range of positive end-expiratory pressure, together with directly measured Ppl in nondependent and dependent pleural regions. All measurements were obtained with minimal nonstressed volumes in the pleural sensors and esophageal balloons. Expiratory and inspiratory Pl was calculated by subtracting local Ppl or Pes from airway pressure; inspiratory Pl was also estimated by subtracting Ppl (calculated from chest wall and respiratory system elastance) from the airway plateau pressure. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: In pigs and human cadavers, expiratory and inspiratory Pl using Pes closely reflected values in dependent to middle lung (adjacent to the esophagus). Inspiratory Pl estimated from elastance ratio reflected the directly measured nondependent values. CONCLUSIONS: These data support the use of esophageal manometry in acute respiratory distress syndrome. Assuming correct calibration, expiratory Pl derived from Pes reflects Pl in dependent to middle lung, where atelectasis usually predominates; inspiratory Pl estimated from elastance ratio may indicate the highest level of lung stress in nondependent "baby" lung, where it is vulnerable to ventilator-induced lung injury.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1164/rccm.201709-1806oc

Cites

25 of 25 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 25 references

Cited by

See all 258

Metadata

Authors
Yoshida, T., Amato, M. B. P., Grieco, D. L., Chen, L., Lima, C. A. S., Roldan, R., Morais, C. C. A., Gomes, S., Costa, E. L. V., Cardoso, P. F. G., Charbonney, E., Richard, J.-C. M., Brochard, L., & Kavanagh, B. P.
Venue
American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine
Published
2018-04-15
Volume
197
Issue
8
Pages
1018-1026
ISSN
  • 1073-449X (ISSN-L)
  • 1535-4970
OpenAlex
W2784003249
Cited by
258
References
25
FWCI
21.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Esophageal Manometry and Regional Transpulmonary Pressure in Lung Injury. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1164/rccm.201709-1806oc
The paper
Yoshida, T., Amato, M. B. P., Grieco, D. L., Chen, L., Lima, C. A. S., Roldan, R., Morais, C. C. A., Gomes, S., Costa, E. L. V., Cardoso, P. F. G., Charbonney, E., Richard, J.-C. M., Brochard, L., & Kavanagh, B. P. (2018). Esophageal Manometry and Regional Transpulmonary Pressure in Lung Injury. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1164/rccm.201709-1806oc

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.