Cardiovascular effects of intravenous ghrelin infusion in healthy young men
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ghrelin infusion improves cardiac function in patients suffering from cardiac failure, and bolus administration of ghrelin increases cardiac output in healthy subjects. The cardiovascular effects of more continuous intravenous ghrelin exposure remain to be studied. We therefore studied the cardiovascular effects of a constant infusion of human ghrelin at a rate of 5 pmol/kg per minute for 180 min. Fifteen healthy, young (aged 23.2 +/- 0.5 yr), normal-weight (23.0 +/- 0.4 kg/m(2)) men volunteered in a randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover study. With the subjects remaining fasting, peak myocardial systolic velocity S', tissue tracking TT, left ventricular ejection fraction EF, and endothelium-dependent flow-mediated vasodilatation were measured. Ghrelin infusion increased S' 9% (P = 0.002) and TT 10% (P < 0.001), whereas EF, resting blood flow velocity, and endothelium-dependent flow-mediated vasodilatation did not change (P = 0.13). This was associated with a peak in serum growth hormone after 60 min of infusion (37.77 +/- 5.27 ng/ml, P < 0.001), a doubling of free fatty acid levels (P = 0.001), and a 1.6-fold increase in cortisol levels (P < 0.05), whereas glucose and catecholamine levels were constant. In conclusion, supraphysiological levels of ghrelin stimulate left ventricular function in terms of S' and TT in healthy young normal-weight men without changing resting blood flow velocity and endothelium-dependent flow-mediated vasodilatation. The effects did not translate into detectable increments in EF.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".