Impaired Baroreceptor Control of Renal Sympathetic Activity in Human Chronic Heart Failure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The regulation of renal sympathetic activity in the setting of heart failure is largely unexplored. We used the norepinephrine spillover method to address the hypothesis that baroreflex control of renal sympathetic activity is blunted in heart failure. METHODS AND RESULTS: Twenty-two patients were studied, 11 in a group with heart failure and 11 in a group with normal ventricular function. In both groups, renal norepinephrine spillover was assessed in response to sodium nitroprusside infused to steady-state conditions. Sodium nitroprusside resulted in significant reductions in mean systemic arterial pressure (normal group, -13+/-1% [mean+/-SEM]; heart failure group, -12+/-1%). In response to nitroprusside, there was an 85+/-34% increase in renal norepinephrine spillover in the normal group (from 537+/-84 to 840+/-140 pmol/min, P<0.05). Despite similar hemodynamic responses to nitroprusside in the heart failure group, renal norepinephrine spillover was unchanged (from 1420+/-153 to 1387+/-161 pmol/min, P=NS), a response that was significantly different from that seen in the normal group. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with heart failure, compared with those with normal ventricular function, renal sympathetic activity did not change in response to a steady-state infusion of sodium nitroprusside. This result provides evidence for reduced baroreflex control of renal sympathetic activity in heart failure.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".