Respiratory and metabolic effects of massive administration of isotonic saline solution in heaves‐affected and control horses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
REASONS FOR PERFORMING STUDY: It has been suggested that rapid administration of isotonic saline solution relieves airway obstruction in heaves-affected horses, but the efficacy and tolerability of this treatment is poorly documented. OBJECTIVES: To determine the respiratory and metabolic effects of a rapid administration of isotonic saline solution in control horses and those with heaves. METHODS: Thirty litres isotonic saline solution were administered i.v. to 5 control (Group C) and 9 heaves-affected horses (Group H). Pulmonary function testing and arterial blood gas analysis were performed prior to saline infusion, at 90 and 180 mins after starting the infusion, and 1, 3, 6 and 10 days later. PCV, plasma total solids, plasma electrolytes (Na+, Cl- and K+) and venous blood gas analysis were performed prior, during and after saline infusion. RESULTS: Rapid saline administration was shown to have no beneficial effects on lung function during infusion in Group H. On the contrary, they had significantly increased pulmonary resistance (RL) at 180 mins following the initiation of saline administration compared to baseline. In Group C, saline administration resulted in a significant increase in RL at 180 mins and a significant decrease in PaO2 at 90 mins. These results suggest a transient decrement in lung function caused by rapid saline administration. Group H had a metabolic alkalosis with hypochloraemia at baseline compared to control horses. This resolved following i.v. saline administration and returned to baseline within 6 h after treatment had been discontinued. CONCLUSION: The administration of saline to Group H did not improve airway function significantly, but resulted in mild and transient side effects. POTENTIAL RELEVANCE: Rapid administration of isotonic saline alone is not an effective therapy for heaves in horses.
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) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 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".