Anandamide mediates hyperdynamic circulation in cirrhotic rats via CB<sub>1</sub> and VR<sub>1</sub> receptors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Hyperdynamic circulation and mesenteric hyperaemia are found in cirrhosis. To delineate the role of endocannabinoids in these changes, we examined the cardiovascular effects of anandamide, AM251 (CB(1) antagonist), AM630 (CB(2) antagonist) and capsazepine (VR1 antagonist), in a rat model of cirrhosis. EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH: Cirrhosis was induced by bile duct ligation. Controls underwent sham operation. Four weeks later, diameters of mesenteric arteriole and venule (intravital microscopy), arterial pressure, cardiac output, systemic vascular resistance and superior mesenteric artery (SMA) flow were measured after anandamide, AM251 (with or without anandamide), AM630 and capsazepine administration. CB(1), CB(2) and VR1 receptor expression in SMA was assessed by western blot and RT-PCR. KEY RESULTS: Anandamide increased mesenteric vessel diameter and flow, and cardiac output in cirrhotic rats, but did not affect controls. Anandamide induced a triphasic arterial pressure response in controls, but this pattern differed markedly in cirrhotic rats. Pre-administration of AM251 blocked the effects of anandamide. AM251 (without anandamide) increased arterial pressure and systemic vascular resistance, constricted mesenteric arterioles, decreased SMA flow and changed cardiac output in a time-dependent fashion in cirrhotic rats. Capsazepine decreased cardiac output and mesenteric arteriolar diameter and flow, and increased systemic vascular resistance in cirrhotic rats, but lacked effect in controls. Expression of CB(1) and VR1 receptor proteins were increased in cirrhotic rats. AM630 did not affect any cardiovascular parameter in either group. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: These data suggest that endocannabinoids contribute to hyperdynamic circulation and mesenteric hyperaemia in cirrhosis, via CB(1)- and VR1-mediated mechanisms.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".