Impact of methylene blue in addition to norepinephrine on the intestinal microcirculation in experimental septic shock
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Methylene blue (MB) has been used with some success as a treatment for the vasoplegia of vasopressor-refractory septic shock. The putative mechanism of action of MB is the inhibition of endothelial nitric oxide within the microvasculature and improved responsiveness to endogenous catecholamines (norepinephrine (NE)). However, to date, no study has demonstrated the microcirculatory effect of methylene blue in septic shock. The objective of this randomized, controlled, animal study was to show, in an experimentally-induced, septic shock model in rats, the effects of MB and NE on global hemodynamics and the microcirculation. Mean arterial pressure (MAP) was drastically reduced following bacterial endotoxin (lipopolysaccharide, LPS) administration in animals not receiving vasopressors. Only the combination of NE + MB restored MAP to control levels by the end of the three hour experiment. Intravital microscopy of the microcirculation was performed in the terminal ileum in order to examine functional capillary density in intestinal muscle layers and the mucosa, as well as leukocyte activation in venules (rolling, adhesion to the endothelium). Untreated LPS animals showed a significant increase in leukocyte adhesion and a decrease in capillary perfusion in the intestinal microcirculation. In groups receiving NE or NE+MB, we observed a significant decrease in leukocyte adhesion and improved functional capillary density, indicating that microvasculature function was improved. This study suggests that methylene blue may be able to improve hemodynamics while preserving microvascular function in septic shock.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".