MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Intracarotid Nitroprusside Does Not Augment Cerebral Blood Flow in Human Subjects

2002· article· en· W2165629970 on OpenAlexaff
Shailendra Joshi, William L. Young, Huang Duong, Beverly Aagaard, Noeleen Ostapkovich, E. Sander Connolly, John Pile‐Spellman

Bibliographic record

VenueAnesthesiology · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicCassava research and cyanide
Canadian institutionsColumbia College
FundersNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeNational Institute of General Medical Sciences
KeywordsMedicineAugmentCerebral blood flowAnesthesiaNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The recent resurgence of interest in the cerebrovascular effects of nitroprusside can be attributed to the possibility of using nitric oxide donors in treating cerebrovascular insufficiency. However, limited human data suggest that intracarotid nitroprusside does not directly affect cerebrovascular resistance. In previous studies, physiologic or pharmacologic reactivity of the preparation was not tested at the time of nitroprusside challenge. The authors hypothesized that if nitric oxide is a potent modulator of human cerebral blood flow (CBF), then intracarotid infusion of nitroprusside will augment CBF. METHODS: Cerebral blood flow was measured (intraarterial (133)Xe technique) in sedated human subjects undergoing cerebral angiography during sequential infusions of (1) intracarotid saline, (2) intravenous phenylephrine to induce systemic hypertension, (3) intravenous phenylephrine with intracarotid nitroprusside (0.5 microg x kg(-1) x min(-1)), and (4) intracarotid verapamil (0.013 mg x kg(-1) x min(-1)). Data (mean +/- SD) were analyzed by repeated-measures analysis of variance and post hoc Bonferroni-Dunn test. RESULTS: Intravenous phenylephrine increased systemic mean arterial pressure (from 83 +/- 12 to 98 +/- 6 mmHg; n = 8; P < 0.001), and concurrent infusion of intravenous phenylephrine and intracarotid nitroprusside reversed this effect. However, compared with baseline, CBF did not change with intravenous phenylephrine or with concurrent infusions of intravenous phenylephrine and intracarotid nitroprusside. Intracarotid verapamil increased CBF (43 +/- 9 to 65 +/- 11 ml x 100 g(-1) x min(-1); P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The authors conclude that, in humans, intracarotid nitroprusside sufficient to decrease mean arterial pressure during recirculation, does not augment CBF. Failure of intracarotid nitroprusside to augment CBF despite demonstrable autoregulatory vasoconstriction and pharmacologic vasodilation questions the significance of nitric oxide-mediated vasodilation in human cerebral circulation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.200 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations37
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnesthesiologySame topicCassava research and cyanideFrench-language works237,207