Reduced Bile Flow Associated With Parenteral Nutrition Is Independent of Oxidant Load and Parenteral Multivitamins
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Reduction in bile flow is a characteristic of cholestasis related to parenteral nutrition. Light exposure of parenteral multivitamin preparations is the major source of peroxides contaminating parenteral nutrition solutions. They may contribute to local oxidative stress. Oxidants are reported to affect transport mechanisms across the hepatocyte membrane into bile. The authors hypothesize that an oxidant-antioxidant imbalance is involved in parenteral nutrition related cholestasis. The aim of this study was to investigate the roles of multivitamin preparations and peroxides on bile flow in newborn guinea pigs receiving parenteral nutrition. METHODS: Three-day-old guinea pigs were fed enterally or parenterally with solutions containing 8% dextrose/0.45% NaCl +/- multivitamin preparation +/- amino acids +/- lipids. The influence of the oxidant-antioxidant balance on bile flow was evaluated using 500 microM hydrogen peroxide and 1% and 3% multivitamin preparations +/- Na metabisulfite. Four days later, animals were anesthetized and bile flow was recorded over 2 hours. Glutathione determinations were performed on bile and liver samples. The percentage of oxidized glutathione, reflecting the redox status, was used as a marker of oxidative stress. Data were compared by analysis of variance with P < 0.05. RESULTS: Bile flow decreased first on initiating dextrose + NaCl infusion (a 25% decrease) and subsequently by adding amino acids (a further 30% decrease). Although antioxidant vitamins and peroxides modified the hepatic redox status, they did not influence bile flow. CONCLUSION: Although the composition of parenteral nutrition affects bile flow and the hepatic redox status, the oxidant-antioxidant imbalance in infused solutions is not the causal event in the installation of cholestasis.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".