Mechanical Ventilation Protects against Diaphragm Injury in Sepsis: Interaction of Oxidative and Mechanical Stresses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Overproduction of nitric oxide (NO) with attendant oxidative and nitrosative stress has been implicated in sepsis-induced diaphragm dysfunction. Here we determined the impact of controlled mechanical ventilation (MV) on rat diaphragm sarcolemmal injury, inducible NO synthase (iNOS) expression, and oxidative stress during endotoxemia. At 4 h after injection of endotoxin, impaired sarcolemmal integrity and decreased force production by the diaphragm were observed in spontaneously breathing rats. The use of MV during endotoxemia largely eliminated sarcolemmal damage and significantly improved diaphragm force production. These benefits were not associated with alterations in either iNOS expression or protein carbonyls (marker of oxidation), which remained abnormally elevated in septic diaphragms despite MV. Therefore, we hypothesized that the protection afforded by MV was due to its ability to decrease the level of mechanical stress placed on the sarcolemma, because the latter could be hyperfragile in the setting of increased oxidative stress. Using an in vitro system to independently modulate oxidative and mechanical stresses, we confirmed that these two factors act together in a synergistic fashion to favor sarcolemmal injury. Accordingly, our data suggest that MV protects the diaphragm during sepsis by abrogating an injurious interaction between oxidative and biomechanical stresses imposed on the sarcolemma.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".