Antiplatelet therapy mitigates cardiac remodeling and dysfunction in congestive heart failure due to myocardial infarctionThis article is one of a selection of papers published in the special issue Bridging the Gap: Where Progress in Cardiovascular and Neurophysiologic Research Meet.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Antiplatelet agents such as sarpogrelate (SAR), a 5-hydroxytryptamine antagonist, and cilostazol (CIL), a phosphodiesterase-III inhibitor, are used in the management of peripheral vascular disease. In this study, we tested the hypothesis that both SAR and CIL prevent cardiac remodeling and improve cardiac function in congestive heart failure (CHF) due to myocardial infarction (MI). Post-MI rats (3 weeks after the occlusion of coronary artery) received either vehicle (MI+V, n = 36), SAR (MI+SAR; 5 mg xc kg(-1) x day(-1), n = 35) or CIL (MI+CIL; 5 mg x kg(-1) x day(-1), n = 34) from day 21 to day 56. Sham-operated rats (n = 29) served as controls. Electrocardiographic, echocardiographic, and hemodynamic parameters were measured on day 56. Treatment of infarcted animals with SAR or CIL significantly improved the left ventricular (LV) dimensions, LV fractional shortening, cardiac output, stroke volume, mean arterial pressure, LV diastolic function, and LV systolic pressure, as well as rates of LV pressure development and pressure decay. Although cardiac hypertrophy was reduced, both SAR and CIL had no effect on infarct size or MI-associated QTc prolongation. However, SAR decreased whereas CIL increased the incidence of ventricular arrhythmias and the mean number of episodes in infarcted animals. Mortality during the treatment period was decreased by 17% with SAR and increased by 10% with CIL, but these changes were not significant statistically. The data in this study suggest that both SAR and CIL prevent cardiac remodeling and improve cardiac function in MI-induced CHF; however, CIL unlike SAR increased the incidence of arrhythmias and adversely affected patient mortality.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".