Dronedarone and Captisol-enabled Amiodarone in an Experimental Cardiac Arrest
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare the energy required for defibrillation and postshock outcomes after the administration of dronedarone, amiodarone, and placebo in a porcine model of cardiac arrest. METHODS: Forty-two pigs were randomized to amiodarone, dronedarone, or control treatments. After induction of ventricular fibrillation, compressions and ventilations were performed for 3 minutes and treatment was administered over 30 seconds. If defibrillation was unsuccessful, cardiopulmonary resuscitation continued and repeated shocks were administered every 2 minutes with continual hemodynamic monitoring for a total duration of 30 minutes. RESULTS: The cumulative energy required for defibrillation was 570 ± 422 J for dronedarone, 441 ± 365 J for amiodarone, and 347 ± 281 J for control (P = not significant). Survival at 30 minutes was 1 (7.1%) for dronedarone compared with 11 (78.6%) for control (P = 0.001). Mortality in the dronedarone group was because of refibrillation in 3 (21.4%) cases, atrioventricular block in 1 (7.1%) case, and hypotension not because of bradycardia in 9 (64.3%) cases. Two minutes after successful defibrillation, systolic aortic pressure was lower in dronedarone versus control (86.6 ± 26.9 vs. 110 ± 15.1 mm Hg; P = 0.035). CONCLUSIONS: The administration of dronedarone resulted in a significant reduction in survival and both systolic aortic and coronary perfusion pressure compared with control.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".