Preischemic administration of ribose to delay the onset of irreversible ischemic injury and improve function: studies in normal and hypertrophied hearts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Compared with normal hearts, those with pathology (hypertrophy) are less tolerant of metabolic stresses such as ischemia. Pharmacologic intervention administered prior to such stress could provide significant protection. This study determined, firstly, whether the pentose sugar ribose, previously shown to improve postischemic recovery of energy stores and function, protects against ischemia when administered as a pretreatment. Secondly, the efficacy of this same pretreatment protocol was determined in hearts with pathology (hypertrophy). For study 1, Sprague-Dawley rats received equal volumes of either vehicle (bolus i.v. saline) or ribose (100 mg/kg) before global myocardial ischemia. In study 2, spontaneously hypertensive rats (SHR; blood pressure approximately 200/130) with myocardial hypertrophy underwent the same treatment protocol and assessments. In vivo left ventricular function was measured and myocardial metabolites and tolerance to ischemia were assessed. In normal hearts, ribose pretreatment significantly elevated the heart's energy stores (glycogen), and delayed the onset of irreversible ischemic injury by 25%. However, in vivo ventricular relaxation was reduced by 41% in the ribose group. In SHR, ribose pretreatment did not produce significant elevations in the heart's energy or improvements in tolerance to global ischemia, but significantly improved ventricular function (maximal rate of pressure rise (+dP/dt(max)), 25%; normalized contractility ((+dP/dt)/P), 13%) despite no change in hemodynamics. Thus, administration of ribose in advance of global myocardial ischemia does provide metabolic benefit in normal hearts. However, in hypertrophied hearts, ribose did not affect ischemic tolerance but improved ventricular function.
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) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".