A prospective randomized study of diluted versus non-diluted cardioplegia (minicardioplegia) in primary coronary artery bypass surgery.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: Sanguineous (blood) cardioplegia has been established as the prime option for myocardial protection but the choice of dilution (4:1 blood to crystalloid ratio) versus use of blood from the cardiopulmonary bypass alone (minicardioplegia) remains controversial. The purpose of this prospective randomized clinical trial was to compare the clinical outcome and enzymatic endpoints (troponin I, CK-MB isoenzyme release) in patients undergoing primary CABG surgery. METHODS: From June 1999 to October 2000, 59 patients were randomized preoperatively to undergo coronary artery bypass grafting surgery using cardiopulmonary bypass and either diluted (4:1 blood to crystalloid ratio; n=25) or undiluted sanguineous cardioplegia (minicardioplegia; n=4) at the Montreal Heart Institute. Clinical data and biochemical markers of ischemia were recorded. Tepid cardioplegia and moderate hypothermic cardiopulmonary bypass were used in 92% of patients. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in preoperative variables between the 2 groups. There were no statistically significant differences in low output syndrome, stroke rate, arrhythmia or hospital length of stay between both groups. There was no statistically significant difference between minicardioplegia and diluted groups in the release of troponin T 24 hours postoperatively (0.36+/-0.31 versus 0.23+/-0.22, respectively). There was a slightly higher release of troponin T in the minicardioplegia group 48 hours after surgery (0.38+/-0.35 versus 0.20+/-0.16) (p=0.03) and of CK-MB 24 hours postoperatively (22.9+/-18.6 versus 10.2+/-5.3) (p<0.01). CONCLUSION: Clinical outcomes are similar in patients undergoing primary CABG surgery with tepid cardioplegia and moderate hypothermic bypass with diluted or minicardioplegia. Minicardioplegia may be the optimal method of myocardial protection because of low cost, ease of use and lack of hemodilutive 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 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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".