MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2048685088 · doi:10.1159/000059406

Epinephrine Fails to Hasten Hemodynamic Recovery in Fully Developed Canine Anaphylactic Shock

2002· article· en· W2048685088 on OpenAlexafffund
Edgar Bautista, F. Estelle R. Simons, Keith J. Simons, Allan B. Becker, Krika Duke, Michelle Tillett, W. Kepron, Steven N. Mink

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Archives of Allergy and Immunology · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFood Allergy and Anaphylaxis Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersManitoba Lung AssociationHospital Research Foundation
KeywordsMedicineHemodynamicsAnesthesiaEpinephrineBlood pressurePlaceboMean arterial pressureShock (circulatory)Internal medicineHeart rate

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Epinephrine (Epi) is the treatment of choice for reversing cardiovascular collapse in anaphylactic shock (AS). However, there are few data supporting its use in this condition, and most treatment guidelines have been anecdotally derived. In the present study, the time course of hemodynamic recovery from maximal hypotension was investigated in a canine model of AS in which Epi was administered by the intravenous (IV), subcutaneous (SQ) and intramuscular (IM) routes on different occasions. The findings obtained with Epi treatment were compared to those in a nontreatment study. METHODS: Ragweed-sensitized dogs were examined in respective studies approximately 5 weeks apart in which Epi was administered by one of the above routes in a randomized design. Either Epi (0.01 mg/kg) or placebo was administered at maximal hypotension, and hemodynamics were followed for 3 h after shock. The animals were studied while ventilated and anesthetized. Mean arterial pressure (MAP), cardiac output, stroke volume (SV), pulmonary wedge pressure (Pwp) and plasma Epi concentrations were obtained at each measurement interval. RESULTS: In the IV study, Epi produced a transient immediate increase in MAP, SV and Pwp as compared to the nontreatment study (144 vs. 52 mm Hg; 32 vs. 12 ml; 9 vs. 5 mm Hg; p < 0.01), but no differences were observed 15 min after shock. Hemodynamics were not different between Epi and no treatment at any intervals when Epi was given by the SQ and IM routes. AS compared with the placebo study, plasma Epi concentrations were higher in the IV and IM studies, but not in the SQ study. CONCLUSIONS: Although higher Epi concentrations were observed in the IM and IV studies, a sustained benefit in hemodynamic recovery was not observed in this anesthetized, ventilated canine model. In AS, when administered during maximum shock after mediators have already been released, a single IM, IV or SQ dose of Epi may have limited utility in the treatment of cardiovascular collapse. Earlier administration of Epi, before maximal hypotension occurs, may produce a more beneficial effect.

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 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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.883
Threshold uncertainty score0.835

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.244 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations102
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Archives of Allergy and ImmunologySame topicFood Allergy and Anaphylaxis ResearchFrench-language works237,207