Troponin-I release after cardiac surgery with different surgical techniques and post-operative neurological outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cerebral hypoperfusion during cardiopulmonary bypass surgery has been thought to be a factor in the aetiology of brain damage with evidence of post-operative neurological deficits. Cardiac-specific biomarkers such as troponin-I, troponin-T and CK-MB have been used extensively to predict myocardial injury and ischaemia. This prospective study investigated the level of troponin-I release in both off-pump and CPB-technique CABG surgery, as well as postulated a relationship of troponin release and post-operative neurological outcome. A total of 44 adult patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) were enrolled into either an off-pump or on-pump groups, with 22 patients participating in each. Group A (on-pump) underwent myocardial revascularisation with CPB and cardioplegic arrest, while Group B (off pump) underwent beating heart surgery. The measurement of troponin-I is a 1-step enzyme immunoassay method, with specificity and sensitivity set at 0.4 ug/mL. Neurological assessment was done using the NIH Stroke Scale, and neuropsychologic assessment was assessed on cognitive function using modified Weschler Memory Scale, for which scores were standardized to achieve a composite measure of concentration. A set of statistical analysis was done to correlate troponin-I release with different surgical techniques of CPB and OPCAB. Although each independent technique showed a marked rise of troponin-I from baseline to 6 hours post-operatively, the difference in troponin release was not significant between the 2 groups at specified time intervals (p=0.124). There was however a significant correlation of troponin-I release with the number of grafts used in the surgery, irrespective of the type of grafts or surgical technique. None of the patients in either group showed any neurological or cognitive deficits presenting at day 3 and day 7 post-operatively. The findings of this study demonstrate that there is no significant short-term cognitive or neurological dysfunctions post-operatively, as indicated by troponin-I release in assessing the severity of myocardial injury.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".