MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2120235639 · doi:10.25011/cim.v34i1.15104

Comparison between arterial and venous sampling of circulating hormones, substrates and peptides in severe obesity

2011· article· en· W2120235639 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Julie Martin, Jessica Smith, Marjorie Bastien, Katherine Cianflone, Jean S. Bussières, Simon Marceau, Frédéric‐Simon Hould, Stéfane Lebel, Laurent Biertho, Odette Lescelleur, Simon Biron, F Bertrand, Paul Poirier

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical and investigative medicine · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Disease and Adiposity
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalInstitut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de Québec
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineNEFAAdiponectinLeptinInternal medicineGhrelinVenous bloodInsulinObesityEndocrinologyBlood samplingHormoneCardiologyInsulin resistance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.292
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.074 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2011
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical and investigative medicineSame topicCardiovascular Disease and AdiposityFrench-language works237,207