MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract Sun802: Intravenous versus Intraosseous Vasopressor Administration During Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation of Asphyxiated Neonatal Piglets

2025· article· en· W4415791561 on OpenAlexaff
Marwa Ramsie, Po‐Yin Cheung, Raza Hyderi, Tze Fun Lee, Megan O’Reilly, Georg M. Schmölzer

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal Respiratory Health Research
Canadian institutionsRoyal Alexandra HospitalUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReturn of spontaneous circulationCardiopulmonary resuscitationEpinephrineVasopressinResuscitationCardiac resuscitation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Current neonatal resuscitation guidelines recommend epinephrine preferably be given via intravenous (IV) or intraosseous (IO) routes during cardiac arrest. Vasopressin might be an alternative during asphyxial cardiac arrest; however, whether it remains effective when administered via IO is unclear. Objective: We aimed to compare IO with IV vasopressin or epinephrine on incidence and time to return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) in asphyxiated newborn piglets. Design/Methods: Thirty-two newborn piglets ( n =8/group) were anesthetized, intubated, instrumented, and exposed to 45 minutes of normocapnic hypoxia, followed by asphyxiation till asystolic cardiac arrest. Piglets were randomized to 0.4IU/kg IV or IO vasopressin, or 0.02mg/kg IV or IO epinephrine. Drug was administered via IV or IO 1 minute after the start of chest compressions (CCs) and administered every 3 minutes as needed if no return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) was observed, to a maximum of three doses. Results: Rates of ROSC were not different between IV or IO vasopressin, 5/8(63%) vs 3/8(38%), respectively ( p =0.619), or between IV or IO epinephrine, 2/8(25%) vs 6/8(75%), respectively ( p =0.132). Rates of ROSC were similar between all four groups ( p =0.233). Median (IQR) time to ROSC was 254 (220-473)sec and 215 (200-240)sec for IV and IO vasopressin, respectively ( p =0.143), and 272 (265-278)sec and 233 (203-266)sec for IV and IO epinephrine, respectively ( p =0.286). Time to ROSC was similar amongst all groups ( p =0.312). Conclusions: In a neonatal piglet model of asystolic cardiac arrest, administration of IO vasopressin or epinephrine resulted in similar resuscitative outcomes to IV vasopressin or epinephrine. Our findings suggest that IO vasopressor administration is effective during neonatal resuscitation, and that IO vasopressin is a feasible alternative to IV vasopressin.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.312 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation→Same topicNeonatal Respiratory Health Research→French-language works237,207→