Effects of Amrinone and Dobutamine on PGF <sub>2α</sub> -lnduced Pulmonary Hypertension in Dogs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The hemodynamic benefits and pulmonary vascular selectivity of amrinone, dobutamine and amrinone + dobutamine were assessed in a canine model of vasoconstrictive pulmonary hypertension. Dogs were equipped with central and peripheral catheters and with an electromagnetic flow probe placed around the ascending aorta for the measurement of cardiac function. Through a laparotomy, an arteriovenous fistula was created between the abdominal aorta and the inferior vena cava. Gradual opening of this fistula, which permitted construction of pressure-flow curves (mean pulmonary artery pressure over the cardiac index, PAP/CI), was utilized to identify the pulmonary vascular effects of amrinone and dobutamine. PGF2 alpha, prostaglandin derivative, induced stable pulmonary hypertension along with significant reduction in CI. The resultant pulmonary hypertension translated into a significant increase in both the slope and pressure intercept of the PAP/CI curve. The bipyridine derivative, amrinone, did not reverse the CI reduction observed with PGF2 alpha: both mean arterial pressure and PAP were decreased as was the intercept of the PAP/CI curve. Dobutamine, a beta-agonist, reversed the CI decline elicited by PGF2 alpha but the elevated pulmonary pressure remained unaffected; dobutamine reduced the slope of the PAP/CI curve. When combined, amrinone and dobutamine demonstrated additive beneficial hemodynamic effects and improved lung perfusion. Their additive effects were also indicated by data on the PAP/CI curve: both the slope and the pressure intercept were significantly reduced. These results suggest that amrinone and dobutamine interact at different sites of the pulmonary vasculature and that their association might be beneficial in vasoconstrictive pulmonary hypertension although no significant pulmonary vascular selectivity could be observed.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".