Bilateral atrial ganglionated plexus involvement in atrial responses to left-sided plexus stimulation in canines
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: Given the clinical interest concerning 'reflex vagal' responses to identify left atrial (LA) targets for ablative therapy of atrial fibrillation, we investigated whether vagal and bilateral atrial neural pathways may be involved in chronotropic and atrial repolarization responses to LA ganglionated plexus (GP) stimulation. METHODS AND RESULTS: Unipolar electrograms were recorded from 191 right atrial (RA) and LA sites in anaesthetized canines prior to and during electrical stimulation of the right vagus nerve (VgN), left VgN, or LAGP at baseline and following (i) bilateral VgN decentralization, and radiofrequency ablation of (ii) periaortic/superior vena cava (Ao/SVC) and (iii) RAGP in 14 animals (anterograde group), and in the reverse order in 7 (retrograde). Repolarization changes were also measured in similar preparations during Ao/SVC (n = 8) and RAGP stimulation (n = 23). Sinus cycle length (SCL) prolongation, and RA and LA repolarization changes (affected atrial surface area) were induced during LAGP stimulation. SCL prolongation and RA repolarization changes were unaffected by VgN decentralization but reduced following Ao/SVC and RAGP ablation in the anterograde group. In the retrograde group, chronotropic and RA repolarization changes were reduced following RAGP and abolished following Ao/SVC ablation. In contrast, LA repolarization responses to LAGP stimulation were reduced following VgN decentralization and each subsequent ablation step, with small residual responses after completing the anterograde protocol. Ao/SVC and RAGP stimulation exerted predominant influences in adjacent regions as well as demonstrating LA extensions. CONCLUSION: Vagal as well as bilateral atrial neural pathways are involved in mediating chronotropic and LA repolarization responses to LAGP stimulation.
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".