Redox modulation of the inotropic response to dobutamine is impaired in patients with heart failure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It has been suggested that oxidative stress contributes to impaired left ventricular (LV) contractility in the setting of heart failure (HF). To test this hypothesis, we studied the effect of an antioxidant on contractility at rest and in response to dobutamine in 10 HF patients. We hypothesized that vitamin C would augment contractility in HF and that this effect would be of a greater magnitude in HF patients compared with patients with normal LV (NLV) function. Data from 10 patients with NLV function who participated in this study are included in this report and have been published elsewhere. A micromanometer-tipped catheter was introduced into the LV. In the experimental protocol, an infusion catheter was positioned in the left main coronary artery. The peak positive rate of change of LV pressure (LV +dP/dt) was measured in response to the intravenous infusion of dobutamine before and during the intracoronary infusion of vitamin C (96 mg/min). Vitamin C had no effect on basal LV +dP/dt in either HF or NLV groups. The infusion of vitamin C augmented the LV +dP/dt response to dobutamine by 22 +/- 4% in the NLV function group. In contrast, vitamin C had no effect on the inotropic response to dobutamine in the HF group. In the control protocol, without vitamin C, no differences were observed between responses to two sequential dobutamine infusions in either group (HF, n = 11; NLV, n = 9). Therefore, a positive effect of vitamin C on contractility was limited to patients with NLV function. The absence of this effect in HF patients may suggest that normal redox responsiveness is lost in this disease state.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".