Anesthetic Preconditioning Combined with Postconditioning Offers No Additional Benefit Over Preconditioning or Postconditioning Alone
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Brief BACKGROUND: Recent investigations demonstrate that anesthetic preconditioning and postconditioning reduce myocardial infarct size to a degree comparable to that achieved with ischemic preconditioning. We hypothesized that the combination of sevoflurane preconditioning and postconditioning would result in greater preservation of myocardium. METHODS: Langendorff perfused rat hearts were divided into four groups: control, preconditioning, postconditioning, and preconditioning plus postconditioning. During reperfusion, left ventricular function (left ventricular developed pressure, left ventricular end diastolic pressure, and dp/dt) were measured. At the end of reperfusion, the infarct sizes were measured with 2,3,5 triphenyltetrazolium chloride staining. Nuclear magnetic resonance was used to measure intracellular pH, Na+, and Ca2+. RESULTS: Left ventricular developed pressure, left ventricular end diastolic pressure, left ventricular dp/dtmax and dp/dtmin were significantly improved in the treatment groups when compared with those in the controls. Myocardial infarct size (24% ± 7%, 16% ± 8%, and 22% ± 7% in preconditioning, postconditioning, and pre-plus postconditioning groups versus 44% ± 8% in the control group, P < 0.05) and intracellular Na+ and Ca2+ were significantly decreased in all experimental groups at the end of reperfusion when compared with those in control. However, there were no differences between these variables in each treatment group. CONCLUSION: Sevoflurane postconditioning is as effective as preconditioning in protecting myocardial function after global ischemia. The combination of sevoflurane preconditioning and postconditioning offered no additional benefit over either intervention alone. IMPLICATIONS: The results of this study support the hypothesis that exposure to sevoflurane during the early minutes of reperfusion (anesthetic postconditioning) attenuates reperfusion injury resulting in preservation of myocardial function and decreased infarct size comparable to anesthetic preconditioning. The combination of anesthetic preconditioning and postconditioning offered no additional benefit over either intervention alone.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".