Compensatory hyperhidrosis following thoracic sympathectomy: a biophysical rationale
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A side-effect of endoscopic thoracic sympathectomy (ETS) is compensatory hyperhidrosis (CH), characterized by excessive sweating from skin areas with intact sudomotor function. The physiological mechanism of CH is unknown, but may represent an augmented local sweat rate from skin areas with uninterrupted sympathetic innervation based on evaporative heat balance requirements. For a given combination of activity and climate, the same absolute amount of evaporation (if any) is needed to balance the rate of metabolic heat production both pre- and post-ETS. However, the rate of local sweating per unit of skin surface area with intact sudomotor activity must be greater post-ETS as evaporation must be derived from a smaller skin surface area. Under conditions with high evaporative requirements, greater degradations in sweating efficiency associated with an increased dripping of sweat should also occur post-ETS, further pronouncing the sweat rate required for heat balance. In conclusion, in addition to the potential role of psychological stimuli for increased sudomotor activity, the existence of CH post-ETS can be described by the interplay between fundamental thermoregulatory physiology and altered heat balance biophysics and does not require a postoperative alteration in physiological control.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".