Hemodynamic changes during aortic valve surgery among patients with aortic stenosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction. Patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) undergoing surgery are at increased risk of hypotension and hypoperfusion. Although treatable with inotropic agents or fluid, little is known about how these therapies affect central hemodynamics in AS patients under general anesthesia. We measured changes in central hemodynamics after dobutamine infusion and fluid bolus among patients with severe AS and associated these changes with preoperative echocardiography. Methods. We included 33 patients with severe AS undergoing surgical AVR. After induction of general anesthesia, hemodynamic measurements were obtained with a pulmonary artery catheter, including Cardiac index (CI), stroke volume index (SVi) and pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWP). Measurements were repeated during dobutamine infusion, after fluid bolus and lastly after sternotomy. Results. General anesthesia resulted in a decrease in CI and SVi compared to preoperative values. During dobutamine infusion CI increased but mean SVi did not (38 ± 12 vs 37 ± 13 ml/m2, p = .90). Higher EF and SVi before surgery and a larger decrease in SVi after induction of general anesthesia were associated with an increase in SVi during dobutamine infusion. After fluid bolus both CI, SVi (48 ± 12 vs 37 ± 13 ml/min/m2, p < .0001) and PCWP increased. PCWP increased mostly among patients with a larger LA volume index. Conclusion. In patients with AS, CI can be increased with both dobutamine and fluid during surgery. Dobutamine’s effect on SVI was highly variable and associated with baseline LVEF, and an increase in CI was mostly driven by an increase in heart rate. Fluid increased SVi at the cost of an increase in PCWP.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".