Kupffer cell-initiated remote hepatic injury following bilateral hindlimb ischemia is complement dependent
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Intravital fluorescence microscopy was applied to the livers of male Wistar rats to test the hypothesis that complement mobilization stimulates Kupffer cells and subsequently initiates hepatic injury after hindlimb ischemia/reperfusion (I/R). Following 3 h of limb reperfusion, hepatocellular viability (serum levels of alanine transaminase and cell death via propidium iodide labeling) decreased significantly from levels in sham-operated animals. Inhibition of complement mobilization with soluble complement receptor type 1 (20 mg/kg body wt) and interruption of Kupffer cell function with GdCl(3) (1 mg/100g body wt) resulted in significant hepatocellular protection. Although the effects of hindlimb I/R on hepatic microvascular perfusion were manifest as increased heterogeneity, both complement inhibition and suppression of Kupffer cell function resulted in marked improvements. No additional hepatocellular protection and microvascular improvements were provided by combining the interventions. Furthermore, inhibition of complement mobilization significantly depressed Kupffer cell phagocytosis by 42% following limb reperfusion. These results suggest that the stimulation of Kupffer cells via complement mobilization is necessary but is not the only factor contributing to the early pathogenesis of hepatic injury following hindlimb I/R.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".