In Vitro Comparative Effect of Carbetocin and Oxytocin in Pregnant Human Myometrium with and without Oxytocin Pretreatment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to compare in vitro contractile effects of oxytocin and carbetocin on human term pregnant myometrium with and without oxytocin pretreatment. METHODS: This laboratory investigation was conducted on myometrial samples from women undergoing elective cesarean deliveries. The samples were dissected into four strips and suspended in individual organ bath chambers containing physiologic salt solution. After equilibration, they were pretreated with oxytocin 10 M (experimental group) or physiologic salt solution (control group) for 2 h and then subjected to dose-response testing with increasing concentrations of oxytocin or carbetocin (10 to 10 M). The amplitude, frequency, motility index (amplitude × frequency), and area under the curve of contractions were recorded and analyzed during the equilibration and dose-response periods. Comparisons were made between oxytocin-induced and carbetocin-induced contractions in control and oxytocin-pretreated groups. Motility index was the primary outcome measure. RESULTS: Sixty-three experiments were performed (carbetocin, n = 31; oxytocin, n = 32) on samples from 18 women. The motility index of contractions (√g.contractions/10 min) produced by oxytocin was significantly higher than carbetocin in both control (regression-estimated difference, 0.857; 95% CI, 0.290 to 1.425; P = 0.003) and oxytocin-pretreated (0.813; 0.328 to 1.299; P = 0.001) groups. The motility index was significantly lower in oxytocin-pretreated groups than their respective controls for both oxytocin (-1.040; -1.998 to -0.082; P = 0.03) and carbetocin (-0.996; -1.392 to -0.560; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In vitro contractions produced by oxytocin are superior to carbetocin in human myometrium with or without oxytocin pretreatment. Oxytocin pretreatment results in attenuation of contractions induced by both oxytocin and carbetocin.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".