Captopril Suppression Versus Salt Loading in Confirming Primary Aldosteronism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This prospective study was designed to compare the captopril suppression test with the salt-loading approach to confirm the diagnosis of primary aldosteronism. A total of 49 patients were referred with a presumed diagnosis of primary aldosteronism. The captopril test was performed in the morning with patients in the seated position after overnight fasting. Blood samples for plasma aldosterone were obtained before captopril administration (25 mg PO) and again 2 hours later. Patients were then subjected to a high salt diet (300 mmol sodium per day for 3 days). On the third day, urinary sodium (24 hours) was measured, and plasma aldosterone levels were measured at 8:00 AM (recumbent) and at noon (standing). Of the 49 patients, 44 had nonsuppressible aldosterone concentrations with all the clinical characteristics of primary aldosteronism: 22 patients had surgically confirmed unique adenoma, and 22 patients had presumed bilateral hyperplasia. There was a significant correlation between plasma aldosterone values of salt-loaded patients (mean of 8:00 AM and noon results) and the values 2 hours after captopril administration (r=0.8, P<0.01). Plasma aldosterone cumulative distribution curves in primary aldosteronism patients (adenoma and hyperplasia) were not significantly different between the 2 suppression tests. Our results showed that the captopril suppression test is as effective as sodium loading in confirming the diagnosis of primary aldosteronism.
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 | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".