Cardio-centric hemodynamic management improves spinal cord oxygenation and mitigates hemorrhage in acute spinal cord injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Chronic high-thoracic and cervical spinal cord injury (SCI) results in a complex phenotype of cardiovascular consequences, including impaired left-ventricular contractility. Here, we sought to determine whether such dysfunction manifests immediately post-injury, and if so, whether correcting impaired contractility can improve spinal cord oxygenation (SCO 2 ), blood flow (SCBF) and metabolism. Using a porcine model of SCI, we demonstrate that high-thoracic SCI acutely impairs cardiac contractility and causes substantial reductions in intraparenchymal SCO 2 and SCBF within the first hours post-injury. Utilizing the same model, we next show that treating the reduced contractile function with the β-agonist dobutamine is more efficacious at increasing SCO 2 and SCBF than the current clinical standard of vasopressor therapy, whilst also mitigating increased anaerobic metabolism and hemorrhage in the injured cord. Our data provide compelling evidence that cardio-centric hemodynamic management represents a novel and advantageous alternative to the current clinical standard of vasopressor therapy for acute traumatic SCI.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".