MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2591773584 · doi:10.2967/jnumed.116.185991

Arterial CO<sub>2</sub> as a Potent Coronary Vasodilator: A Preclinical PET/MR Validation Study with Implications for Cardiac Stress Testing

2017· article· en· W2591773584 on OpenAlexaff
Hsin‐Jung Yang, Damini Dey, Jane Sykes, Michael A. Klein, John Butler, Michael S. Kovacs, Olivia Sobczyk, Behzad Sharif, Xiaoming Bi, Avinash Kali, Ivan Cokic, Richard Tang, Roya Yumul, Antonio Hernandez Conte, Sotirios A. Tsaftaris, Mourad Tighiouart, Debiao Li, Piotr J. Slomka, Daniel S. Berman, Frank S. Prato, Joseph A. Fisher, Rohan Dharmakumar

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nuclear Medicine · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced MRI Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoLawson Health Research InstituteWestern University
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsHypercapniaAdenosineVasodilationMedicineBlood flowPerfusionCardiologyInternal medicineCoronary circulationHemodynamicsAnesthesiaChemistryAcidosis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Myocardial blood flow (MBF) is the critical determinant of cardiac function. However, its response to increases in partial pressure of arterial CO2 (PaCO2), particularly with respect to adenosine, is not well characterized because of challenges in blood gas control and limited availability of validated approaches to ascertain MBF in vivo. Methods: By prospectively and independently controlling PaCO2 and combining it with 13N-ammonia PET measurements, we investigated whether a physiologically tolerable hypercapnic stimulus (∼25 mm Hg increase in PaCO2) can increase MBF to that observed with adenosine in 3 groups of canines: without coronary stenosis, subjected to non–flow-limiting coronary stenosis, and after preadministration of caffeine. The extent of effect on MBF due to hypercapnia was compared with adenosine. Results: In the absence of stenosis, mean MBF under hypercapnia was 2.1 ± 0.9 mL/min/g and adenosine was 2.2 ± 1.1 mL/min/g; these were significantly higher than at rest (0.9 ± 0.5 mL/min/g, P < 0.05) and were not different from each other (P = 0.30). Under left-anterior descending coronary stenosis, MBF increased in response to hypercapnia and adenosine (P < 0.05, all territories), but the effect was significantly lower than in the left-anterior descending coronary territory (with hypercapnia and adenosine; both P < 0.05). Mean perfusion defect volumes measured with adenosine and hypercapnia were significantly correlated (R = 0.85) and were not different (P = 0.12). After preadministration of caffeine, a known inhibitor of adenosine, resting MBF decreased; and hypercapnia increased MBF but not adenosine (P < 0.05). Conclusion: Arterial blood CO2 tension when increased by 25 mm Hg can induce MBF to the same level as a standard dose of adenosine. Prospectively targeted arterial CO2 has the capability to evolve as an alternative to current pharmacologic vasodilators used for cardiac stress testing.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.073
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.324 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations16
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Nuclear MedicineSame topicAdvanced MRI Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207