MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410313426 · doi:10.12659/msm.947864

Effect of Cerebrolysin on Cognitive Function and Delirium in Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Patients.

2025· article· en· W4410313426 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Adam Stadnik, Maja Jezierska, Włodzimierz Płotek, Dorota Siwicka-Gieroba, Radosław Mlak, Wojciech Dąbrowski

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurological Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCerebrolysinDeliriumArteryCognitionInternal medicineMedicineCardiologyBypass graftingFunction (biology)Intensive care medicinePsychiatryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND The occurrence of delirium in the first days after cardiac surgery is associated with a worse prognosis. We studied the effect of cerebrolysin (CBL) given to patients undergoing elective coronary artery bypass grafting surgery (CABG) under extracorporeal circulation, on the postoperative results in the Montreal Cognitive Assessment score (MoCA) results, and the rate of delirium detected by using the Confusion Assessment Method (CAM). MATERIAL AND METHODS Adult patients undergoing elective CABG surgery under propofol-based anesthesia were divided into 2 groups: the study group received 50 ml of CER preoperatively and on the 4 subsequent consecutive days, and the control group did not receive CER. MoCA was used to assess cognition, and CAM was applied to detect delirium. Both tests were performed preoperatively, as well as on the 2nd and 5th postoperative days. RESULTS The study [n=29] and control [n=26] groups were well-balanced in terms of basic demographic, psychological, and clinical variables. Although significantly lower values of the MoCA (medians: 27 vs 24, respectively; P=0.0083) were detected in the study group in the second assessment, the pre- and postoperative MoCA values did not differ between the analyzed groups. Delirium occurred in 3 cases, and only in the control group, and the difference was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS Patients maintained their cognitive status. The lack of delirium in the study group prompts us to develop a plan for a large-scale multicenter study assessing the potential ability of CER to reduce the risk of delirium in cardiac surgery patients.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicNeurological Disorders and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207