The relationship between cerebral and somatic oxygenation and superior and inferior vena cava flow, arterial oxygenation and pressure in infants during cardiopulmonary bypass*
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigated blood flow and regional oxygenation (rSO(2)) during cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). Twenty infants (mean (SD) age 5 (3) months, weight 5.4 (1.6) kg) were prospectively studied. Total CPB and superior vena cava (SVC) flow were measured using Transonic Bypass Flowmeters, inferior vena cava (IVC) flow derived arithmetically and rSO(2) measured using Near Infra-Red Spectroscopy. Mean SVC flow was 51.3 (14.8) ml.kg(-1).min(-1) and mean IVC flow 62.5 (19.0) ml.kg(-1).min(-1). Mean cerebral rSO(2) was 71 (11)% and somatic rSO(2) 55 (13)%. Cerebral and somatic rSO(2) showed no correlation with SVC and IVC flow. Cerebral rSO(2) showed a positive correlation with P(a)co(2), mean arterial pressure (MAP) and haematocrit (p < 0.0001). Somatic rSO(2) showed a positive correlation with MAP and haematocrit (p = 0.01, p = 0.02). In conclusion, the distribution of blood flow during CPB varies. The most important factor affecting this is P(a)CO(2). Cerebral and somatic oxygenation are unaffected by flow but significantly influenced by MAP, haematocrit and P(a)CO(2).
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 | 0.003 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".