Vagal dysfunction in irritable bowel syndrome assessed by rectal distension and baroreceptor sensitivity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Autonomic nervous system dysfunction has been implicated in the pathophysiology of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). This study characterized the autonomic response to rectal distension in IBS using baroreceptor sensitivity (BRS), a measure of autonomic function. Rectal bag pressure, discomfort, pain, ECG, blood pressure and BRS were continuously measured before, during and after rectal distension in 98 healthy volunteers (34 +/- 12 years old, 52 females) and 39 IBS patients (39 +/- 11 years old, 35 females). In comparison with the healthy volunteers, IBS patients experienced significantly more discomfort (69 +/- 2.2% vs 56 +/- 3.6%; P < 0.05), but not pain (9 +/- 1.4% vs 6 +/- 2.4%; ns) with rectal distension despite similar distension pressures (51 +/- 1.4 vs 54 +/- 2.4 mmHg; ns) and volumes (394 +/- 10.9 vs 398 +/- 21.5 mL; ns). With rectal distension, heart rate increased in both healthy volunteers (66 +/- 1 to 71 +/- 1 bpm; P < 0.05) and IBS patients (66 +/- 2 to 74 +/- 3 bpm; P < 0.05). Systolic blood pressure also increased in both healthy volunteers (121 +/- 2 to 143 +/- 2 mmHg; P < 0.05) and patients (126 +/- 3 to 153 +/- 4 mmHg (P < 0.05) as did diastolic blood pressure, 66 +/- 2 to 80 +/- 2 mmHg (P < 0.05), compared with 68 +/- 3 to 84 +/- 3 mmHg (P < 0.05) in IBS patients. The systolic blood pressure increase observed in IBS patients was greater than that seen in healthy volunteers and remained elevated in the post distension period (139 +/- 3 mmHg vs 129 +/- 2 mmHg; P < 0.05). IBS patients had lower BRS (7.85 +/- 0.4 ms mmHg(-1)) compared with healthy volunteers (9.4 +/- 0.3; P < 0.05) at rest and throughout rectal distension. Greater systolic blood pressure response to rectal distension and associated diminished BRS suggests a compromise of the autonomic nervous system in IBS patients.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".