MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2787808275 · doi:10.14740/cr646w

Critical Management of Severe Hypotension Caused by Amlodipine Toxicity Managed With Hyperinsulinemia/Euglycemia Therapy Supplemented With Calcium Gluconate, Intravenous Glucagon and Other Vasopressor Support: Review of Literature

2018· article· en· W2787808275 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kishore Kumar, Madhavi Biyyam, Bharat Bajantri, Suresh Kumar Nayudu

Bibliographic record

VenueCardiology Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPoisoning and overdose treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAmlodipineHyperinsulinemiaCalciumInternal medicineCardiologyGlucagonPharmacologyBlood pressureInsulin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Calcium channel blocker (CCB ) overdose, whether intentional or accidental, is a common clinical scenario and can be very lethal. Conventional treatments for CCB overdose include intravenous (IV) fluids, calcium salts, dopamine, dobutamine, norepinephrine, phosphodiesterase inhibitors, and glucagon. However, the conventional therapies are unsuccessful in reversing the cardiovascular toxicity of CCB, so they commonly fail to improve the hemodynamic condition of the patient. Blockade of the L-type calcium channels that mediate the antihypertensive effect of CCBs also decreases the release of insulin from pancreatic β-islet cells and reduces glucose uptake by tissues (insulin resistance). By targeting this insulin-mediated pathway, hyperinsulinemia/euglycemia therapy (HIET) appears to have a distinct role, and its clinical potential is underrecognized in the management of severe CCB toxicity. We present a case of young man with amlodipine toxicity successfully managed with high dose of IV insulin therapy.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.323 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCardiology ResearchSame topicPoisoning and overdose treatmentsFrench-language works237,207