Effect of Laparoscopic Colon Resection on Postoperative Glucose Utilization and Protein Sparing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
HYPOTHESIS: Using a stable isotope method to quantify postoperative changes in glucose and protein metabolism, patients undergoing laparoscopic-assisted colon resection and receiving 4 mg . kg(-1) . min(-1) of dextrose intravenously will (1) have more pronounced suppression of endogenous glucose production, leading to (2) a greater reduction in whole-body protein breakdown. DESIGN: Randomized protocol study. SETTING: Tertiary health care center in Montreal, Quebec. PATIENTS: Twelve patients scheduled for colonic resection were randomly allocated to undergo either laparoscopic (n = 6) or open (n = 6) surgery. INTERVENTIONS: Patients underwent a 6-hour stable isotope infusion study (3 hours fasted and 3 hours fed with dextrose infusion) on postoperative day 2. Whole-body protein breakdown and synthesis, amino acid oxidation, and endogenous glucose production and clearance were measured during the postabsorptive state using L-[1-(13)C]leucine and [6,6-(2)H(2)]glucose. Gas exchange and plasma concentrations of metabolites and hormones were also measured. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Endogenous glucose production and whole-body protein breakdown during the fasted and fed states. RESULTS: In the fasted state, laparoscopy did not affect protein and glucose metabolism. Dextrose infusion suppressed endogenous glucose production in both groups, with the greatest extent in the laparoscopic group (P = .01). Higher respiratory quotients (P = .001) in the latter group also indicated increased exogenous glucose oxidation. Neither surgical approach nor nutrition affected aspects of protein metabolism. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopy for colon resection facilitates whole-body glucose uptake and utilization and oxidation of exogenous glucose with no protein-sparing effect. The laparoscopic approach modulates gluconeogenesis, although it is not sufficient in the presence of exogenous energy to promote nitrogen retention.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".