Cardiovascular Responses to Vibrostimulation for Sperm Retrieval in Men With Spinal Cord Injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: Cardiovascular abnormalities and arrhythmias are common in individuals with spinal cord injury (SCI) who are undergoing vibrostimulation for sperm retrieval. The study aimed to examine cardiovascular control in men with SCI undergoing this procedure. METHODS: Individuals with chronic cervical (n=8; age: 33.1 +/- 1.9 years) and upper thoracic SCI (n=5; age: 35.2 +/- 2.9 years) volunteered for vibrostimulation, with continuous blood pressure (Finometer) and electrocardiographic monitoring. Patients were characterized further by sympathetic skin responses (SSR) to assess descending autonomic spinal pathways and American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) scores to assess motor and sensory pathways. RESULTS: All but one subject with cervical SCI were ASIA A or B and were negative for SSR in the hands and feet. All subjects with upper thoracic SCI were ASIA A or B and were positive for SSR in the hands. Systolic blood pressure was lower in men with cervical injury at rest. Vibrostimulation induced an increase in systolic blood pressure >20 mmHg in all patients with cervical SCI (range = 125/65 - 280/152; median = 167/143 mmHg) and in 2 thoracic subjects (151/104 and 170/121 mmHg). During ejaculation, 6 cervical and 3 thoracic subjects developed arrhythmias (5 with bradycardia, 6 with premature atrial contractions, 4 with ventricular excitation, 1 with junctional rhythm, and 1 with heart block). CONCLUSION: The vibrostimulation procedure induced electrocardiographic abnormalities and autonomic dysreflexia in subjects with either cervical or high thoracic SCI.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".