Vitamin C to Improve Organ Dysfunction in Cardiac Surgery Patients—Review and Pragmatic Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The pleiotropic biochemical and antioxidant functions of vitamin C have sparked recent interest in its application in intensive care. Vitamin C protects important organ systems (cardiovascular, neurologic and renal systems) during inflammation and oxidative stress. It also influences coagulation and inflammation; its application might prevent organ damage. The current evidence of vitamin C's effect on pathophysiological reactions during various acute stress events (such as sepsis, shock, trauma, burn and ischemia-reperfusion injury) questions whether the application of vitamin C might be especially beneficial for cardiac surgery patients who are routinely exposed to ischemia/reperfusion and subsequent inflammation, systematically affecting different organ systems. This review covers current knowledge about the role of vitamin C in cardiac surgery patients with focus on its influence on organ dysfunctions. The relationships between vitamin C and clinical health outcomes are reviewed with special emphasis on its application in cardiac surgery. Additionally, this review pragmatically discusses evidence on the administration of vitamin C in every day clinical practice, tackling the issues of safety, monitoring, dosage, and appropriate application strategy.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".