Effects of sleeve gastrectomy and ileal transposition, alone and in combination, on food intake, body weight, gut hormones, and glucose metabolism in rats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bariatric surgeries are hypothesized to produce weight loss and improve diabetes control by multiple mechanisms including gastric restriction and lower gut stimulation; the relative importance of these mechanisms remains poorly understood. We compared the effects of a typical foregut procedure, sleeve gastrectomy, (SG) with a primarily hindgut surgery, ileal transposition (IT), alone and together (SGIT), or sham manipulations, on food intake, body weight, gut hormones, glucose tolerance, and key markers of glucose homeostasis in peripheral tissues of adult male Sprague-Dawley rats (450-550 g, n = 7-9/group). SG, IT, and SGIT surgeries produced transient reduction in food intake and weight gain; the effects of SG and IT on intake and body weight were nonadditive. SG, IT, and SGIT surgeries resulted in increased tissue expression and plasma concentrations of the lower gut hormones glucagon-like peptide-1 and peptide YY and decreased plasma glucose-dependent insulinotropic peptide, insulin, and leptin concentrations. Despite transient effects on intake and weight gain, the SG, IT, and SGIT surgeries produced a significant improvement in glucose tolerance. In support of glycemic improvements, the protein abundance of key markers of glucose metabolism (e.g., GLUT4, PKA, IRS-1) in muscle and adipose tissue were increased, whereas the expression of key gluconeogenic enzyme in liver (G-6-Pase) were decreased following the surgeries. Therefore, our data suggest that enhanced lower gut stimulation following SG, IT, and SGIT surgeries leads to transient reduction in food intake and weight gain together with enhanced secretion of lower gut hormones and improved glucose clearance by peripheral tissues.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".