Hepatic venous dysregulation contributes to blood volume pooling in cirrhotic rats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: In cirrhosis, despite increased total blood volume, the circulation behaves as if it were volume depleted, a phenomenon termed "decreased effective circulating volume". As the gut/liver veins are the major blood reservoir, this suggests hepatosplanchnic venous pooling. We therefore aimed to elucidate the vasoactive responses of the hepatic veins in cirrhosis. METHODS: Cirrhosis was induced by chronic bile duct ligation in rats. The in vivo responses of postsinusoidal venules and sinusoids to vasoactive drugs, 20% haemorrhage, and 20% mannitol (volume expansion) were examined by intravital microscopy. In isolated perfused livers, change in liver weight was measured as an index of the hepatic vascular volume response. RESULTS: Blood volume was significantly increased in cirrhotic rats. In the cirrhotic hepatic vasculature, constrictive responses to norepinephrine and haemorrhage were blunted compared with controls. In contrast, the dilatory responses to the nitric oxide (NO) donor sodium nitroprusside and volume expansion were enhanced. Both constrictive and dilatory abnormalities were reversed by the NO synthase inhibitor N-nitro-L-arginine methyl ester. CONCLUSIONS: The hepatic sinusoidal and venous bed of cirrhotic rats showed an enhanced dilatory capacity to buffer volume increases but inadequately constricted in response to volume depletion or catecholamines. Both abnormalities may contribute to volume pooling and are mediated by NO.
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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".