Alternate antegrade/retrograde perfusion: an effective technique to preserve hypertrophied hearts during valvular surgery☆
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Continuous antegrade perfusion (AP) may interfere with surgical precision. Continuous retrograde perfusion (RP), on the other hand, cannot sustain the empty-beating hypertrophied hearts. Therefore, alternate antegrade/retrograde perfusion (A(A/R)P) may be a rational technique to preserve the hypertrophied hearts. This study is to determine whether A(A/R)P could maintain myocardial energy metabolism, oxygenation, and contractile function of the empty-beating hypertrophied hearts. METHODS: Sixteen hypertrophied pig hearts were divided into four groups (n=4 per group). Group I and II underwent an 80-min A(A/R)P (four 10-min APs and four 10-min RPs), followed by a 20-min reperfusion. Group III and IV were subjected to an 80-min AP and 20-min reperfusion and used as a control. Energy metabolism was evaluated in group I and III using magnetic resonance spectroscopy. Myocardial oxygenation (MO) was assessed in group II and IV using near infrared spectroscopic imaging. RESULTS: During 80-min A(A/R)P, four episodes of RP resulted in a significant decrease in myocardial phosphocreatine (PCr) and MO. The subsequent AP, however, resulted in complete recovery of the parameters. Moreover, myocardial adenosine triphosphate (ATP) remained at a normal level throughout the 80-min A(A/R)P. As expected, hearts in groups III and IV showed normal level of myocardial PCr, ATP, and MO throughout protocol. Finally, hearts in all four groups showed similar contractile function during reperfusion. CONCLUSIONS: A(A/R)P with four 10-min intervals of AP and RP sustained normal myocardial energy metabolism, oxygenation, and contractile function of empty-beating hypertrophied hearts. We conclude that A(A/R)P is an effective technique for preservation of empty-beating hypertrophied hearts during valvular surgery.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".