Vasopressin and Methylene Blue: Alternate Therapies in Vasodilatory Shock
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) is frequently complicated by vasoplegic syndrome, a vasodilatory shock state. Traditional treatment based on fluid resuscitation and catecholamine drugs is ineffective in a number of patients. Clinical trials investigating both vasopressin and methylene blue as additional rescue or preventative therapy are reviewed. Vasopressin is suggested to retain its vasoconstrictive power in hypoxemia and acidosis, lower pulmonary hypertension, reduce supraventricular arrhythmias, and accelerate intensive care unit (ICU) recovery. Safety concerns include frequent thrombocytopenia and potentially altered mesenteric and renal perfusion. Methylene blue is suggested to facilitate CPB weaning, reduce renal, respiratory, arrhythmic, and septic complications, reduce mortality, and accelerate ICU and hospital recovery. Safety concerns include oximeter interference, pulmonary hypertension, neurotoxicity, arrhythmias, and potentially altered coronary, mesenteric, and renal perfusion. Research on both molecules is ongoing and has yet to confirm on a larger scale their efficacy and safety as treatments for post-CPB vasoplegic syndrome.
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) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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".