4.6 Article

Automated Classification of Whole Body Plethysmography Waveforms to Quantify Breathing Patterns

Journal

FRONTIERS IN PHYSIOLOGY
Volume 12, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fphys.2021.690265

Keywords

whole body plethysmography; cluster; waveform; opioid; ampakine

Categories

Funding

  1. National Institutes of Health [R01 HL139708, OT2 OD023854, F31 HL145831]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study developed a waveform cluster analysis method to quantify dynamic changes in respiratory waveforms, and applied it to study the effects of drug overdose and treatment on breathing. The method allows for rapid assessment of breathing patterns and may provide insights into how disease or therapy affect breathing.
Whole body plethysmography (WBP) monitors respiratory rate and depth but conventional analysis fails to capture the diversity of waveforms. Our first purpose was to develop a waveform cluster analysis method for quantifying dynamic changes in respiratory waveforms. WBP data, from adult Sprague-Dawley rats, were sorted into time domains and principle component analysis was used for hierarchical clustering. The clustering method effectively sorted waveforms into categories including sniffing, tidal breaths of varying duration, and augmented breaths (sighs). We next used this clustering method to quantify breathing after opioid (fentanyl) overdose and treatment with ampakine CX1942, an allosteric modulator of AMPA receptors. Fentanyl caused the expected decrease in breathing, but our cluster analysis revealed changes in the temporal appearance of inspiratory efforts. Ampakine CX1942 treatment shifted respiratory waveforms toward baseline values. We conclude that this method allows for rapid assessment of breathing patterns across extended data recordings. Expanding analyses to include larger portions of recorded WBP data may provide insight on how breathing is affected by disease or therapy.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available