Pain and inflammatory response following off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Inflammation and pain are two common clinical issues following cardiac surgery, which are important to patient outcomes. This article reviews the literature regarding inflammation and pain following cardiac surgery with special emphasis on off-pump cardiac surgery. RECENT FINDINGS: Off-pump surgery is associated with decreased intraoperative inflammatory response compared with procedures using cardiopulmonary bypass; however, the postoperative pattern of inflammatory response is similar to on-pump procedures. Multimodal analgesic regimens and protocol-based approaches to pain management improve analgesia compared to conventional approaches. SUMMARY: Off-pump cardiac surgeries although known to decrease the inflammatory burden do not appear to impact the overall patient outcomes. Recent evidence indicates the prothrombotic tendency following off-pump procedures, which could be related to the time course of inflammation following off-pump cardiac surgery. There might be some benefit of off-pump procedures regarding neurological and renal function that needs further studies. Pain management following off-pump procedures is similar to that of patients undergoing on-pump cardiac surgery. Better caregiver and patient education is crucial for improving pain control following cardiac surgery. Analgesic regimens need to consider adjuvants and regional analgesic techniques and patient-controlled modalities while providing care.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".