The Erythropoietin NeuroProtective Effect: Assessment in CABG Surgery (TENPEAKS)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Neurocognitive dysfunction complicates coronary artery bypass surgery. Erythropoietin may be neuroprotective. We sought to determine whether human recombinant erythropoietin would reduce the incidence of neurocognitive dysfunction after surgery. METHODS: We randomly assigned 32 elective first-time coronary artery bypass graft patients to receive placebo or 375 U/kg, 750 U/kg, or 1500 U/kg of recombinant human erythropoietin divided in 3 daily doses, starting the day before surgery. Primary outcomes were feasibility and safety, and secondary outcomes were neurocognitive dysfunction at discharge and 2 months. RESULTS: All subjects were male, mean age 60 years (range 46 to 73). No significant differences were found in pump time, cross-clamp time, or hospital length of stay. Mortality and pure red cell aplasia were not observed. One patient in the 375 U/kg group had ST changes compatible with myocardial injury immediately postoperative, but no other thrombotic complications were observed. Neurocognitive dysfunction occurred in 21/32 (66%) of patients at discharge and 5/32 (16%) at 2 months. Neurocognitive dysfunction at discharge by group was: placebo 6/8 (75%), 375 U/kg 4/8 (50%), 750 U/kg 6/8 (75%), and 1500 U/kg 5/8 (63%). Neurocognitive dysfunction at 2 months by group was: placebo 3/8 (38%), 375 U/kg 1/8 (13%), 750 U/kg 1/8 (13%), and 1500 U/kg 0/8 (0%). Neurocognitive dysfunction at 2 months for erythropoietin at any dose was 2/24 (8.3%) versus 3/8 (38%) for placebo (P=0.085). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates feasibility and safety for the use of human recombinant erythropoietin as a neuroprotectant in coronary artery bypass graft surgery. A trend in the reduction of neurocognitive dysfunction at 2 months was associated with erythropoietin use. A multicenter randomized controlled trial is warranted.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".