Comparison between arterial and venous sampling of circulating hormones, substrates and peptides in severe obesity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Severely obese patients are being encountered more frequently in clinical practice. Factors implicated in the relationship between obesity and cardiovascular disease may be measured from a blood sample obtained through arterial access in a cardiology setting, such as during cardiac catheterization or heart surgery. The comparability of a given sample site (arterial vs. venous) with regards to blood parameters is yet to be established. METHODS: Fifteen severely obese patients undergoing bariatric surgery were recruited. Fasting blood samples were collected simultaneously from the radial artery (A) and the superior vena cava (V), both representing general circulating levels, after anesthesia but before the surgical procedure. Blood samples were analysed for glucose, insulin, non-esterified fatty acids (NEFA), leptin, adiponectin, total ghrelin, high sensitive C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) and amino-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) concentrations. RESULTS: Arterial and venous concentrations of all factors analysed showed no statistical difference (all p values > 0.1); leptin A: 39 ± 16 vs. V: 42 ± 18 ng/mL; total ghrelin A : 0.86 ± 0.27 vs. V : 0.76 ± 0.35 ng/mL; adiponectin A: 7.7 ± 3.3 vs. V: 7.7 ± 3.6 μg/mL; insulin A: 17.9 ± 9.7 vs. V: 18.6 ± 10.5 μU/mL; glucose A: 8.3 ± 2.1 vs. V: 7.9 ± 2.2 mM; NEFA A: 0.98 ± 0.93 vs. V: 0.89 ± 0.38 mM ; hs-CRP A: 10.17 ± 7.68 vs. V: 10.27 ± 7.30 μg/mL and NT-proBNP A: 54.3 ± 47.9 vs. V: 54.7 ± 49.3 pg/mL. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that radial artery and superior vena cava blood collection sites are comparable and may be used clinically with respect to fasting glucose, NEFA, leptin, adiponectin, total ghrelin, hs-CRP and NT-proBNP concentrations in a group of severely obese patients.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".