Abstract 273: A Blinded Evaluation of Combination Drug Therapy for Prolonged Ventricular Fibrillation Cardiac Arrest
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background : There are many examples of medical disease treatment innovating from single agent, failure-based, serial medication delivery to first-line combination drug therapy. Could the same approach improve outcomes in the metabolic phase of VF? Objective: Using a swine model of prolonged VF, we compared ROSC and 20-minute survival in animals treated with single agents given in series to animals provided first-line combination drug therapy. Methods : The study was IACUC approved. Eighty swine (25-30 kg) were surgically instrumented under anesthesia, and VF was electrically induced. After 12 minutes of untreated VF, animals were 2:1 block randomized to 1 of 2 resuscitation schemes. SERIES (n=53) received: epinephrine (0.01 mg/kg [SDE]); vasopressin (0.57 mg/kg); amiodarone (4.3 mg/kg) and SDE; sodium bicarbonate (1 mEq/kg) and SDE - each delivery punctuated by a RS after 3 minutes of CPR. If ROSC occurred after any RS, supportive care was provided and subsequent medications were not given. COCKTAIL (n=27) received all drugs together (with metoprolol [0.2 mg/kg]), followed by CPR and RS1. A SDE followed each failed RS. All drugs were given IV with a flush. CPR and RS attempts were standardized. Resuscitation continued until ROSC was achieved or 20 minutes elapsed without ROSC. Group comparisons were assessed using descriptive statistics. Proportions with 95%CI were calculated for VF termination, ROSC, and survival. Results : At baseline, the two groups were similar. The figure summarizes our findings. SERIES outcomes mirrored historical controls. Conclusion : In this swine model of prolonged OHCA, short-term outcomes were adversely affected by this drug/dosage combination.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".