Replacement of Glucose with <i>N</i> -Acetylglucosamine in Peritoneal Dialysis Fluid—Experimental Study in Rats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Glucose is still used as an osmotic solute in peritoneal dialysis fluids, despite evidence of its local (peritoneal) and systemic toxicities. However a constant search is underway for a new, more biocompatible osmotic solute for peritoneal dialysis fluids. OBJECTIVE: The present study evaluated N-acetylglucosamine (NAG) in a concentration of 220 mmol/L as an alternative to glucose for the osmotic solute in peritoneal dialysis fluid, during chronic peritoneal dialysis in rats. METHODS: For 8 weeks, male Wistar rats were infused with glucose-based or NAG-based dialysis fluid. Intraperitoneal inflammation and peritoneal permeability and morphology were evaluated in all rats during the study. RESULTS: Repeated intraperitoneal infusion of the NAG-based dialysis fluid resulted in a weaker intra-abdominal inflammatory reaction as compared with the reaction in rats infused with glucose-based dialysis solution. At the end of the study, the concentration of hyaluronan in the peritoneal interstitium obtained from NAG-treated rats was higher than that found in the interstitium taken from animals exposed to dialysis fluid containing glucose. Also, peritoneal permeability to total protein was lower in NAG-treated rats. CONCLUSION: As an alternative to glucose, NAG used for the osmotic solute in peritoneal dialysis solution decreases the intraperitoneal inflammatory reaction induced by the process of peritoneal dialysis and, indirectly (owing to the increased hyaluronan content in the peritoneal interstitium), diminishes peritoneal permeability to protein.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".