Microcirculatory response during on-pump versus off-pump coronary artery bypass graft surgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The use of cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) during coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) is associated with a systemic inflammatory response, resulting in altered microcirculation. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether beating heart surgery can preserve the microcirculation. METHODS: Sublingual microcirculation was characterized by a Sidestream Darkfield Imaging Microscope during off-pump (OPCABG) and on-pump (ONCABG) surgery. Microcirculatory parameters were evaluated during eight precise perioperative time points. RESULTS: The quality of the microcirculation decreased during early ONCABG. OPCABG resulted in a significantly better microcirculation compared to ONCABG for three of six parameters during surgery. However, by the end of surgery and postoperatively, the microcirculatory parameters were no different between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: While the results do not show a marked preservation of the microcirculation during and after OPCABG compared to ONCABG, they coincide with the body temperature fluctuations of each group during and after surgery. Our work suggests that active warming could impact the microcirculation parameters.
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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".