Abciximab Attenuates Coronary Microvascular Endothelial Dysfunction After Coronary Stenting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor blockade with abciximab decreases ischemic events after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI); however, the mechanism of this benefit has not been fully elucidated. The present study was designed to assess endothelium-dependent vasomotion after coronary stenting and to determine if abciximab alters this response. METHODS AND RESULTS: The study group consisted of 48 patients (59+/-10 years of age) with discrete coronary stenoses who underwent stenting alone (n=28) or stenting plus abciximab (n=20). A control group consisted of 31 additional patients who had vasomotor testing on a non-PCI vessel. Coronary blood flow (CBF) was measured (0.014-inch Doppler wire) 30 minutes after uncomplicated PCI and in response to the intracoronary infusion of acetylcholine (Ach) (10(-7), 10(-6) mol/L Ach) and adenosine (24 microg). Ach-mediated increase in CBF was impaired after stent insertion when compared with the control group (41+/-52% versus 70+/-48%; P<0.05). The stenting plus abciximab group demonstrated a superior CBF response to Ach compared with the stenting alone group (83+/-93% versus 41+/-52%; P<0.05), with no difference between groups in the peak flow or percent change in flow to adenosine. By multivariate analysis, concomitant administration of abciximab was strongly predictive of the change in CBF to Ach (P<0.005). CONCLUSIONS: Abciximab preserves the CBF response to Ach after coronary stenting. The preservation of microvascular endothelial function may help explain the beneficial clinical effect of this agent in patients undergoing PCI.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".