Cerebral Protective Effects of Ginkgo Leaf Extract and Dipyridamole Injection on Patients Undergoing Cardiac Valve Replacement with Cardiopulmonary Bypass
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To observe the effects of ginkgo leaf extract and dipyridamole injection on plasma S-100βprotein,neuronal specific enolase(NSE) and cognitive function in patients undergoing cardiac valve replacement with cardiopulmonary bypass(CPB),and to assess the cerebral protective effects of ginkgo leaf extract and dipyridamole injection.Methods Sixty patients with Montreal cognitive assessment(MoCA) score≥26 and without cognitive dysfunction,undergoing cardiac valve replacement with CPB,were randomly divided into two groups(n =30 each) : observation group and control group.After induction of anesthesia,ginkgo leaf extract and dipyridamole injection(0.5 ml/kg) was infused intravenously in the observation group,while the equivalent volume of normal saline was given in the control group,and the infusion was completed before CPB.Blood samples were taken from central vein before CPB(T0,baseline),30 minutes of CPB(T1),the end of CPB(T2),the end of operation(T3),and 24(T4),48 hours(T5) after operation for determination of concentrations of plasma S-100β protein and NSE.MoCA was used to assess the patient's cognitive function 1 day before operation and 2 days after operation.Results The concentrations of plasma S-100β protein and NSE at T1,T2,T3,T4were significantly lower in the observation group than those in the control group(all P 0.05).The MoCA score was significantly higher while the incidence of postoperative cognitive function was significantly lower 2 days after operation in the observation group than those in the control group(P 0.05).Conclusion Ginkgo leaf extract and dipyridamole injection can reduce the concentrations of plasma S-100β protein and NSE,and increase the incidence of postoperative cognitive function in patients undergoing cardiac valve replacement with CPB,which has a cerebral protective effect.
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) | 0.000 | 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 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".