Cardioprotective Effects of Glucose and Insulin Administration While Maintaining Normoglycemia (GIN Therapy) in Patients Undergoing Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CONTEXT: Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is complicated by ischemia-reperfusion injury jeopardizing myocyte survival. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to investigate whether glucose and insulin administration, while maintaining normoglycemia (GIN therapy) using a hyperinsulinemic-normoglycemic clamp technique, is cardioprotective in patients undergoing CABG. DESIGN AND SETTING: We conducted a randomized controlled trial at a tertiary care university teaching hospital. PATIENTS: We studied 99 patients undergoing elective CABG. INTERVENTION: Patients were randomly assigned to receive either GIN from the beginning of surgery until 24 h after CABG (GIN, n = 49) or standard metabolic care (control, n = 50). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We measured plasma concentrations of cardiac troponin I and free fatty acids, cardiac function as assessed by transesophageal echocardiography, glycogen content, glycogen synthase activity, and the expression of AMP-activated protein kinase (AMPK) and protein kinase B (AKT) in cardiomyocytes. RESULTS: Patients receiving GIN therapy showed an attenuated release of cardiac troponin I (P < 0.05) and improved myocardial function (P < 0.05). Systemic free fatty acid concentrations were suppressed (P < 0.05), whereas intracellular glycogen content and glycogen synthase activity were not altered. The AMPK activity remained unchanged during ischemia in the GIN group, whereas it increased in the control group (P < 0.05). Enhanced AKT phosphorylation before ischemia was observed (P < 0.05) in the presence of GIN. However, there was no evidence for AKT-dependent AMPK inhibition. CONCLUSIONS: GIN therapy protects the myocardium and inhibits ischemia-induced AMPK activation.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".