Intracoronary boluses of adenosine and sodium nitroprusside in combination reverses slow/no-reflow during angioplasty: a clinical scenario of ischemic preconditioningThis paper is one of a selection of papers published in this Special Issue, entitled The Cellular and Molecular Basis of Cardiovascular Dysfunction, Dhalla 70th Birthday Tribute.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
No or slow reflow following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), despite the presence of a patent epicardial vessel, is a serious complication resulting in increased morbidity and mortality. In the present study, we have evaluated the combination therapy of adenosine and sodium nitroprusside administered as sequential intracoronary (IC) boluses on no-reflow during PCI. Seventy-five high risk acute coronary syndrome patients who underwent PCI with evidence of initial less than TIMI (thrombolysis in myocardial infarction) III flow or developed deterioration in TIMI flow during the procedure were randomized to prophylactic administration of multiple boluses of IC saline solution, adenosine (12 microg/bolus) or the combination of adenosine (12 microg/bolus) and sodium nitroprusside (50 microg/bolus), sequentially. Assessment of TIMI and the TMP (tissue myocardial perfusion) grade was done and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) were assessed at the end of 6 months. Slow or no-reflow was persistent in 70% patients receiving saline solution, 31% patients receiving adenosine, and 4% patient receiving the combination. IC injection with saline solution did not produce improvement in TIMI flow or TMP grade. IC injection with combination resulted in greater improvement of TIMI flow and TMP grade. The crossover of patients with no-reflow in saline solution group or adenosine with combination treatment was associated with reestablishment of TIMI II in 4 and TIMI III in 20 patients. Our data suggest that combination therapy of adenosine and nitroprusside is safe and provides better improvement in coronary flow and MACE as compared with IC adenosine alone in cases of impaired flow during coronary interventions.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
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".