Effects of tetrahydrobiopterin on coronary vascular reactivity in atherosclerotic human coronary arteries☆
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Reduced nitric oxide (NO) bioavailability is a key mechanism in the development of endothelial dysfunction. The NO synthase cofactor, tetrahydrobiopterin (BH4), increases NO availability, yet its effect in the human coronary circulation, particularly following PCI, remains uncertain. This study was designed to evaluate the effects of intracoronary BH4 in human coronary arteries with non-critical coronary artery disease or following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). METHODS: The study group consisted of 57 stable patients, 10 of which were controls. Active drug was administered in 47 patients, with either de novo non-critical coronary disease (non-stent group; n=25) or following PCI (stent group; n=22). Coronary blood flow (CBF) was measured (0.014-inch Doppler flow wire) in each of these groups in response to sequential intracoronary infusions of acetylcholine (Ach, 10(-7) & 10(-6) M), BH4 (250 microg/min & 500 microg/min) and a co-infusion of BH4 (500 microg/min) and Ach (10(-7) & 10(-6) M). The primary endpoint evaluated the % change in CBF to Ach compared to co-infusion of Ach and BH4. RESULTS: Mean age was 60+/-10 years (M 45:F 12). Regarding the primary hypothesis, no difference was observed between Ach response compared to co-infusion of BH4 and Ach in the % change in CBF in either the non-stent group (Ach 97+/-122%, Ach/BH4 87+/-95%) or the stent group (Ach 77+/-105%, Ach/BH4 55+/-97%). CONCLUSIONS: In native non-critical coronary artery disease or following PCI, coronary microvascular endothelial function is not improved by co-administration of Ach and BH4.
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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".