MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract 20158: Consequences of Co-isolation of Brain and Heart on the Function of Isolated Cardiac Mitochondria in a Swine Model of Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation

2015· article· en· W2886412608 on OpenAlexaff
Timothy Matsuura, Jason A. Bartos, Adamantios Tsangaris, Kadambari Chandra Shekar, Matthew D Olson, Jennifer Rees, Scott McKnite, Demetris Yannopoulos

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Arrest and Resuscitation
Canadian institutionsStuart Olson (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCardiopulmonary resuscitationVentricular fibrillationAnesthesiaCardiologyHeart rateCardiac function curveEjection fractionIschemiaInternal medicineResuscitationHeart failureBlood pressure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Functional testing of isolated mitochondria is a powerful in vitro tool for determining mitochondrial health following an ischemic stress. Successful preservation of intact mitochondria requires an efficient harvest technique under cold conditions. As heart and brain mitochondria are vital to the success of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), we sought to determine the consequence of co-isolation of these organs on cardiac mitochondrial function in a porcine model of cardiac arrest. Methods: After 15 min of ventricular fibrillation, 36 animals were randomized to active compression decompression + impedance threshold device (ACD-ITD) CPR (Control), or ACD-ITD CPR + ischemic postconditioning (IPC) and further randomized to heart-only (Control n=9, IPC n=11) or heart + brain mitochondrial isolation (Control n=8, IPC n=8). IPC consisted of 3 cycles of 20 sec compression / 20 sec pause for the first 2 min of CPR. Cardiac and brain mitochondria were isolated via differential centrifugation 4 min after initiation of CPR. To minimize warm ischemia, brain biopsies were performed while animals were supine with uninterrupted chest compressions. Heart biopsies were subsequently performed via intercostal incision. Respiratory control index (RCI) and calcium retention capacity (CRC) were measured for complex I and II substrates. Results: Due to technique, heart isolation was delayed by 100 s in heart + brain vs. heart-only animals. In animals with heart-only isolation, IPC increased complex I and II RCI and complex I CRC compared to Controls. In animals with heart + brain isolation, cardiac complex I and II RCI and complex I CRC decreased within the IPC group but not within the Control group. There were no differences in brain mitochondrial function between IPC and Controls. Conclusion: Mitochondrial isolation from multiple organs must consider warm ischemia that may worsen mitochondrial performance. Communication between the brain and heart during biopsy appears to be mediated by a mechanism antagonistic to the beneficial effects of IPC, as isolation of heart and brain resulted in deleterious cardiac mitochondrial performance in IPC but not in Controls. Further investigation is warranted to refine multi-organ mitochondrial isolation.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation→Same topicCardiac Arrest and Resuscitation→French-language works237,207→