Target organ cross talk in cardiorenal syndrome: animal models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The combination of chronic kidney disease (CKD) and heart failure (HF) is associated with an adverse prognosis. Although clinical studies hint at a specific bidirectional interaction between HF and CKD, insight into the pathogenesis of cardiorenal syndrome (CRS) remains limited. We review available evidence on cardiorenal interactions from animal models of CKD and HF and discuss several studies that employed a "double-hit" model to research organ cross talk between the heart and kidneys. Regarding cardiac changes in CKD models, parameters of cardiac remodeling are equivocal and cardiac systolic function generally remains preserved. Structural changes include hypertrophy, fibrosis, and microvasculopathy. In models of HF, data on renal pathology are mostly limited to functional hemodynamic changes. Most double-hit models were unable to show that combined renal and cardiac injury induces additive damage to both organs, perhaps because of the short study duration or absence of organ failure. Because of this lack of "dual-failure" models, we have developed two rat models of combined CKD and HF in which renal dysfunction induced by a subtotal nephrectomy preceded cardiac dysfunction. Cardiac dysfunction was induced either functionally by nitric oxide depletion or structurally by myocardial infarction. In both models, we found that cardiac remodeling and failure were worse in CKD rats compared with controls undergoing the same cardiac insult. Variables of renal damage, like glomerulosclerosis and proteinuria, were also further worsened by combined cardiorenal injury. These studies show that target organ cross talk does occur in CRS. These models may be useful for interventional studies in rats.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".