Protection of the endothelium and endothelial glycocalyx by hydrogen against ischaemia-reperfusion injury in a porcine model of cardiac arrest
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Hydrogen is a potent antioxidant agent that can easily be administered by inhalation. The aim of the study was to evaluate whether hydrogen protects the endothelial glycocalyx layer after successful cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). METHODS: Fourteen anesthetized pigs underwent CPR after induced ventricular fibrillation. During CPR and return of spontaneous circulation, 2% hydrogen gas was administered to seven pigs (hydrogen group) and seven constituted a control group. Biochemistry and sublingual microcirculation were assessed at baseline, during CPR, at the 15th, 30th, 60th, 120th minute. RESULTS: All seven subjects from the hydrogen group and six subjects in the control group were successfully resuscitated after 6-10 minutes. At baseline, there were no statistically significant differences in examined variables. After the CPR, blood pH, base excess, and lactate showed significantly smaller deterioration in the hydrogen group than in the control group. By contrast, plasma syndecan-1 and the measured variables obtained via sublingual microcirculation did not change after the CPR; and were virtually identical between the two groups. CONCLUSION: In pigs, hydrogen gas inhalation during CPR and post-resuscitation care was associated with less pronounced metabolic acidosis compared to controls. However, we could not find evidence of injury to the endothelium or glycocalyx in any studied groups.
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.
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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 it