Monitoring Brain Oxygen Saturation During Coronary Bypass Surgery: A Randomized, Prospective Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cerebral deoxygenation is associated with various adverse systemic outcomes. We hypothesized, by using the brain as an index organ, that interventions to improve cerebral oxygenation would have systemic benefits in cardiac surgical patients. METHODS: Two-hundred coronary artery bypass patients were randomized to either intraoperative cerebral regional oxygen saturation (rSO2) monitoring with active display and treatment intervention protocol (intervention, n = 100), or underwent blinded rSO2 monitoring (control, n = 100). Predefined clinical outcomes were assessed by a blinded observer. RESULTS: Significantly more patients in the control group demonstrated prolonged cerebral desaturation (P = 0.014) and longer duration in the intensive care unit (P = 0.029) versus intervention patients. There was no difference in overall incidence of adverse complications, but significantly more control patients had major organ morbidity or mortality (death, ventilation >48 h, stroke, myocardial infarction, return for re-exploration) versus intervention group patients (P = 0.048). Patients experiencing major organ morbidity or mortality had lower baseline and mean rSO2, more cerebral desaturations and longer lengths of stay in the intensive care unit and postoperative hospitalization, than patients without such complications. There was a significant (r(2) = 0.29) inverse correlation between intraoperative rSO2 and duration of postoperative hospitalization in patients requiring > or =10 days postoperative length of stay. CONCLUSION: Monitoring cerebral rSO2 in coronary artery bypass patients avoids profound cerebral desaturation and is associated with significantly fewer incidences of major organ dysfunction.
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 | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".