Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 274

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Rewarming Rate and Increased Peak Temperature Alter Neurocognitive Outcome After Cardiac Surgery

Grigore, Alina M., Grocott, Hilary P., Mathew, Joseph P., Phillips-Bute, Barbara, Stanley, Timothy O., Butler, Aimee, Landolfo, Kevin P., Reves, Joseph G., Blumenthal, James A., Newman, Mark F.·2002·Anesthesia & Analgesia

Abstract

UNLABELLED: Neurocognitive dysfunction is a common complication after cardiac surgery. We evaluated in this prospective study the effect of rewarming rate on neurocognitive outcome after hypothermic cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). After IRB approval and informed consent, 165 coronary artery bypass graft surgery patients were studied. Patients received similar surgical and anesthetic management until rewarming from hypothermic (28 degrees -32 degrees C) CPB. Group 1 (control; n = 100) was warmed in a conventional manner (4 degrees -6 degrees C gradient between nasopharyngeal and CPB perfusate temperature) whereas Group 2 (slow rewarm; n = 65) was warmed at a slower rate, maintaining no more than 2 degrees C difference between nasopharyngeal and CPB perfusate temperature. Neurocognitive function was assessed at baseline and 6 wk after coronary artery bypass graft surgery. Univariable analysis revealed no significant differences between the Control and Slow Rewarming groups in the stroke rate. Multivariable linear regression analysis, examining treatment group, diabetes, baseline cognitive function, and cross-clamp time revealed a significant association between change in cognitive function and rate of rewarming (P = 0.05). IMPLICATIONS: Slower rewarming during cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) was associated with better cognitive performance at 6 wk. These results suggest that a slower rewarming rate with lower peak temperatures during CPB may be an important factor in the prevention of neurocognitive decline after hypothermic CPB.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/00000539-200201000-00002

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Cited by

See all 274

Metadata

Authors
Grigore, A. M., Grocott, H. P., Mathew, J. P., Phillips-Bute, B., Stanley, T. O., Butler, A., Landolfo, K. P., Reves, J. G., Blumenthal, J. A., & Newman, M. F.
Venue
Anesthesia & Analgesia
Published
2002-01
Volume
94
Issue
1
Pages
4-10
ISSN
0003-2999 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2080897720
Cited by
274
References
2
FWCI
13.01
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Rewarming Rate and Increased Peak Temperature Alter Neurocognitive Outcome After Cardiac Surgery. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/00000539-200201000-00002
The paper
Grigore, A. M., Grocott, H. P., Mathew, J. P., Phillips-Bute, B., Stanley, T. O., Butler, A., Landolfo, K. P., Reves, J. G., Blumenthal, J. A., & Newman, M. F. (2002). The Rewarming Rate and Increased Peak Temperature Alter Neurocognitive Outcome After Cardiac Surgery. Anesthesia & Analgesia. https://doi.org/10.1097/00000539-200201000-00002

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.