Association between NT-proBNP and ivabradine in patients after noncardiac surgery: a per-protocol analysis of the PREVENT-MINS study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The PREVENT-MINS trial investigated whether perioperative heart rate reduction with ivabradine could prevent myocardial injury after noncardiac surgery (MINS). Although ivabradine modestly reduced heart rate, it did not reduce the incidence of MINS in the intention-to-treat analysis. This per-protocol analysis of the PREVENT-MINS trial, with a post-hoc biomarker substudy, evaluated whether perioperative iva-bradine modifies postoperative N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) concentrations, a marker of perioperative cardiovascular risk. METHODS: This analysis included 2008 participants who received ≥ 1 dose of study drug, underwent surgery, and had NT-proBNP and troponin measured (ivabradine: n = 1,001; placebo: n = 1,007). Postoperative NT-proBNP levels and changes from baseline (ΔNT-proBNP) were compared by treatment allocation. Clinical outcomes and safety endpoints from the parent trial were evaluated. Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) assessed ivabradine's effect on postoperative NT-proBNP after adjustment for baseline values and clinical covariates. RESULTS: ; P < 0.001). After adjustment for baseline and relevant clinical covariates, ivabradine was independently associated with an approximately 82% increase in postoperative NT-proBNP (Δlog = 0.59 ± 0.19; 95% CI: 26-164). CONCLUSIONS: Ivabradine did not reduce the incidence of MINS and was associated with greater postoperative NT-proBNP release. Perioperative heart rate reduction with ivabradine may elevate markers of cardiac stress without measurable clinical benefit.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".