Effects of pre-, peri-, and postmyocardial infarction treatment with omapatrilat in rats: survival, arrhythmias, ventricular function, and remodeling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We showed previously that the vasopeptidase inhibitor (VPI) omapatrilat improves peri-myocardial infarction (MI) survival, but the mechanisms involved and whether these effects are sustained remained to be determined, and are the subject of this study. Rats (n = 272) received omapatrilat (20 mg x kg-1x day-1) starting 7 days before MI and continued peri- and post-MI, or no treatment (control). One group of rats had continuous ambulatory ECG and blood pressure recordings started 6 h before MI and continued until 24 h after MI, when survival was evaluated, and the rats were killed, and MI size was evaluated. A second group had left ventricular (LV) remodeling evaluated by echocardiography at 30 days and, at 38 days, had cardiac hemodynamics and morphology done and survival evaluated. Survival 24 h after MI (n = 255) improved with omapatrilat (60% vs. 46% for control; P = 0.0378). Over the next 37 days, there was no further improvement with omapatrilat but the early benefit was sustained. Omapatrilat reduced MI size 24 h after MI (36 +/- 2 vs. 42 +/- 2 mm2 for controls; P = 0.034). Omapatrilat reduced ventricular arrhythmia score 1-12 h after MI. Omapatrilat decreased blood pressure, but not during the first 24 h after MI. Omapatrilat reduced LV diastolic and systolic dimensions and LV and right ventricular weights compared with control large MI, indicating a decrease in reactive hypertrophy. Improvement in cardiac remodeling was accompanied by improved cardiac hemodynamics. Thus this study indicates that pre-, peri-, and post-MI treatment with the VPI omapatrilat is beneficial in survival, ventricular arrhythmias, LV remodeling, and cardiac function.
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) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".