Abstract WP260: Pravastatin Improves Short-term Survival Rate Following Cardiac Arrest and Cardiopulumonary Resuscitation In Mice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Statins (HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors) exert numerous pleiotropic effects and have been shown to attenuate ischemic injury in different rodent models of cerebral focal ischemia. Few studies have examined the effect of statins on post cardiac arrest syndrome. This study conducted cardiac arrest and cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CA/CPR) in mice and tested the hypothesis that intravenous statin after CPR improves survival rate and neurological outcomes. Methods: Adult male mice (20-26 g) were subjected to CA induced by intravenous (IV) KCL. After 8 min of CA, CPR was initiated with IV epinephrine, ventilation with 100% oxygen and chest compressions (rate 300/min). At 1 hr after return of spontaneous circulation, mice were treated with either IV injection of pravastatin (3mg/kg) or vehicle. Four days after CA/CPR, neurobehavioral assessments were performed and brains were removed for histological evaluation in hippocampus and caudateputamen. Results: No difference was found between two groups in body weight, duration of CPR and dose of epinephrine. Survival rate at 4 days after CPR was significantly higher in pravastatin group compared with vehicle group (66.7%; n=24 vs 48.4%; n=33). Neurobehavioral scores in pravastatin group were better than vehicle group at 2 to 4 days after CPR. Body weight loss in vehicle group at 4 days after CPR was higher than pravastatin group (-19.4±1.8% vs -13.4±2.0%), which indicates loss of feeding activity. Histological damages in hippocampus and caudateputamen were not statistically different between two groups (pravastatin: 23.8±7.0% vs vehicle: 35.2±9.2% in hippocampus) (pravastatin: 49.4±7.2% vs vehicle: 60.5±7.8% in caudateputamen). All values are presented as mean±SEM. Conclusions: Single IV injection of pravastatin after CA improved short-term survival and neurobehavioral score in the mouse experimental CA model. Neuronal damage in the brain region was comparable to vehicle group. These data suggest that pravastatin given after CA would be beneficial in the post resuscitation phase via systemic pleiotropic effects such as anti inflammatory response and improved vascular reactivity.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".