MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2034379347 · doi:10.1177/0267659109352114

Outcomes comparison of 5 coated cardiopulmonary bypass circuits versus an uncoated control group of patients undergoing cardiac surgery

2009· article· en· W2034379347 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenuePerfusion · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac and Coronary Surgery Techniques
Canadian institutionsRoyal University Hospital
FundersBayer CanadaUniversity of Saskatchewan
KeywordsMedicineCardiopulmonary bypassOxygenatorAnesthesiaIntensive care unitPlateletCardiac surgerySurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

UNLABELLED: Attenuated inflammatory response and decreased platelet activation have been claimed repeatedly when biocompatible circuits are used for cardiopulmonary bypass. We evaluated five Health Canada approved biocompatible circuit coatings (BCC) against an un-coated control group to determine their effectiveness in improving post-operative outcomes. Patients were assigned to the Control group or one of the 5 coated circuit groups: 40 Control; 33 Trillium; 32 Phisio; 34 Bioline; 33 X; and 11 GBS. Measured outcomes included: ventilator time; ICU time; post-operative chest tube drainage and transfusion volume; high sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP); tau protein; and pre- and 72-hour post-operative anti-saccadic eye movement test comparisons. RESULTS: 183 patients were enlisted into the study. One arm of the study (GBS) was abandoned after 11 patients on account of inconsistent pressure excursions within the oxygenator and the excessive consumption of platelets necessitating transfusion. Patients in the X-coated group had significantly longer ventilator and intensive care unit (ICU) time compared to the three remaining coated circuit study groups. Though not significant, patients in the X group also demonstrated the highest post-operative chest tube losses, the most platelet transfusions, the highest tau protein levels and the lowest post-operative anti-saccadic eye movement test (ASEMT) results compared to the three remaining coated groups. The patients in the Trillium, Bioline and Phisio groups showed an improvement in ventilator and ICU time relative to the Control group. The diabetic patients in the Trillium, Bioline and Phisio groups showed an improvement in bleeding relative to the diabetic patients in the Control group. CONCLUSION: We compared all 5 coated circuits approved for clinical use in Canada against an uncoated control circuit. Three of the 5 coated circuits (Trillium, Phisio and Bioline BCC) were found to improve ventilator and ICU time compared to Control. Further studies are indicated to validate these results and their impact upon approval criteria, purchasing choices and safe clinical practice, especially as applied to higher risk diabetic patients.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.083
Threshold uncertainty score0.939

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.262 · 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