MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Studies on fluid extravasation related to induced hypothermia during cardiopulmonary bypass in piglets

2001· article· en· W1979959584 on OpenAlexaff
Jon-Kenneth Heltne, M. E. Koller, T. Lund, M. Farstad, S. E. Rynning, Joel L. Bert, Paul Husby

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicThermal Regulation in Medicine
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersLaerdal Foundation for Acute Medicine
KeywordsMedicineHypothermiaExtravasationHematocritCardiopulmonary bypassAnesthesiaOncotic pressureExtracorporeal circulationHemoconcentrationInternal medicineAlbuminPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Hypothermia, commonly used for organ protection during cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB), has been associated with changes in plasma volume, hemoconcentration and microvascular fluid shifts. Fluid pathophysiology secondary to hypothermia and the mechanisms behind these changes are still largely unknown. In a recent study we found increased fluid needs during hypothermic compared to normothermic CPB. The aim of the present study was to characterize the distribution of the fluid given to maintain normovolemia. In addition, we wanted to investigate the quantity and quality of the fluid extravasated during hypothermic compared to normothermic CPB. METHODS: Two groups of anesthetized piglets were studied during 2 h of hypothermic (28 degrees C) (n=7) or normothermic (38 degrees C) (n=7) CPB. Net fluid balance (input-output) was recorded. Changes in colloid osmotic pressures of plasma (COPp) and interstitial fluid (COPi), plasma volume (PV), hemoglobin (Hb), hematocrit (HCT), mean corpuscular volume (MCV), s-osmolality, s-albumin and s-total protein was followed throughout the experiments. Fluid extravasation rate was calculated. In addition, total tissue water content was measured and compared with a control group (n=6) (no CPB). RESULTS: During hypothermic compared with normothermic CPB, the average net positive fluid balance from 10-120 min of extracorporeal circulation was 1.35+/-0.06 ml x kg(-1) x min(-1) and 0.33+/-0.03 ml x kg(-1) x min(-1) respectively (P<0.0001). We found a marked increase in fluid extravasation during hypothermic CPB. The extravasation rate during hypothermia was 1.8+/-0.2 ml x kg(-1) x min(-1), (1st hour) and 1.1+/-0.2 ml x kg(-1) x min(-1) (2nd hour) compared with 0.8+/-0.2 ml x kg(-1) x min(-1), and 0.1+/-(0.1) ml x kg(-1) x min(-1) during normothermia, respectively (P<0.01). The total intravascular protein and albumin masses remained constant in both groups. Following hypothermic CPB, the water content increased significantly in all tissues and organs. CONCLUSION: During hypothermic CPB an increased extravasation of fluid from the intravascular to the interstitial space was found. As no leakage of proteins could be demonstrated, based on stable values for albumin and protein masses throughout the experiments, the extravasated fluid contained mainly water and small solutes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.048
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.281 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations35
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueActa Anaesthesiologica ScandinavicaSame topicThermal Regulation in MedicineFrench-language works237,207