Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigExact(18)
neural activity without ventilatory pressurization.
A successful extubation was defined as spontaneous breathing > 48 hrs without ventilatory support.
In patients with restrictive pulmonary disease but without ventilatory autonomy, IPV is expected to improve gas exchange.
Out of those, 51% (291/572) of patients without ventilatory support were considered fluid responsive (Tables 1 and 2).
The rationale behind CMV + proning (introduction) can be achieved with lowered temperature with alpha-2 agonists (10, 11), adequate SV (12) without ventilatory depression (13).
Approximately two-thirds (19/29) of reported maneuvers were deemed adequate or excellent to predict fluid responsiveness in spontaneous breathing patients without ventilatory support and 60% (3/5) were deemed excellent in mechanically ventilated patients in a spontaneous mode.
Similar(42)
Weaning failure was defined as the inability to maintain spontaneous breathing for at least 48 h, without any ventilatory support.
Spontaneously breathing was defined as patients without any ventilatory support, patients on noninvasive mechanical ventilation or patients on invasive mechanical ventilation in a spontaneous mode.
In 3 studies [3/15 (20%)], spontaneous breathing patient without any ventilatory support and patients under mechanical ventilation in a spontaneous mode were included (77 patients) [17, 21, 23].
Results show that the application of PUCA (without mechanical ventilatory assistance) increases the total blood flow, reduces the left ventricular end systolic volume and increases the diastolic aortic pressure.
A pdf file containing quality of each study was evaluated by the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies tool (QUADAS), a receiver operating characteristic curve of methods to assess fluid responsiveness in spontaneous breathing patients without any ventilatory support and in mechanically ventilated patients during a spontaneous mode.
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com