L-arginine supplemented nondiluted blood cardioplegia: a clinical trial.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: L-arginine was shown to improve protection of the myocardium during coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery. The objective of the present study was to determine the concentration of L-arginine to obtain the most effective protection of the myocardium during CABG surgery. METHODS: Seventy-five patients undergoing CABG surgery were randomized in 3 groups. The first group (N.=25) was administered a placebo injection in the blood cardioplegic solution, the second group (N.=25) received an injection of 4 mmol/L of L-arginine and a third group (N.=25) an injection of 6 mmol/L of L-arginine in the blood cardioplegic solution. Blood samples from the ascending aorta and the coronary sinus catheter were collected before, immediately after and at 20 minutes after aortic cross-clamping. Total plasmatic nitrite and nitrate ratio and lactate release from the myocardium in the collected blood samples were measured. RESULTS: Seventy-five patients averaging 62+/-7 years of age and undergoing 3.1+/-1 coronary bypass grafts during 41+/-17 minutes of aortic cross clamping time were recruited. Values of total plasmatic nitrite and nitrate ratio remains non-significant before and after aortic clamping and also between groups (P=0.9812 and 0.3573 respectively). Myocardial lactate release was statistically different before and after cross clamping (P=0.0002) and also between the 3 groups (P=0.0311). CONCLUSION: Nondiluted blood cardioplegic solution supplemented with 4 mmol/L of L-arginine was associated with a significant decrease of myocardial lactate release after aortic cross-clamping and reperfusion during CABG surgery.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".