In vivo protective effects of urocortin on ischemia-reperfusion injury in rat heart via free radical mechanisms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of urocortin (UCN) on oxidative stress and the mechanisms of urocortin on ischemia-reperfusion injury in vivo in the rat model. Thirty-six Sprague-Dawley rats were divided into 6 groups, including sham, control (normal saline solution), UCN1, UCN2, UCN3, and verapamil groups. The left anterior descending coronary artery of all rats except those in the sham group was treated with a 30-min occlusion followed by a 60-min reperfusion. Just before the occlusion, normal saline solution, UCN (5, 10, and 20 microg/kg body mass), or verapamil (1 mg/kg body mass) was administered. Heart rates, beating rhythm, and S-T segments were constantly monitored using an ECG. At the completion of the drug administration, blood samples were taken to measure the activity of superoxide dismutase (SOD), malonaldehyde (MDA), glutathione peroxidase (GSH-PX), and nitric oxide (NO) to evaluate the effects of UCN on oxidative stress. Finally, the size of infarction was measured. Arrhythmia rates were significantly lower, and the infarction size was significantly smaller (p < 0.01), in the UCN groups vs. the control group. Verapamil also significantly reduced arrhythmia rates and infarction size. The MDA activities were remarkably diminished, whereas the SOD, GSH-PX, and NO activities were significantly higher in the UCN and VER groups (p < 0.01). MDA, SOD, and NO activities were strongly correlated with UCN doses. These results suggest that UCN may play a protective role in ischemia-reperfusion injury in rat hearts against the oxidative stress by inhibiting free radicals' activities.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".