Effects of normobaric versus hyperbaric oxygen on cell injury induced by oxygen and glucose deprivation in acute brain slices
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Normobaric oxygen (NBO) and hyperbaric oxygen (HBO) are emerging as a possible co-treatment of acute ischemic stroke. Both have been shown to reduce infarct volume, to improve neurologic outcome, to promote endogenous tissue plasminogen activator-induced thrombolysis and cerebral blood flow, and to improve tissue oxygenation through oxygen diffusion in the ischemic areas, thereby questioning the interest of HBO compared to NBO. In the present study, in order to investigate and compare the oxygen diffusion effects of NBO and HBO on acute ischemic stroke independently of their effects at the vascular level, we used acute brain slices exposed to oxygen and glucose deprivation, an ex vivo model of brain ischemia that allows investigating the acute effects of NBO (partial pressure of oxygen (pO 2 ) = 1 atmospheres absolute (ATA) = 0.1 MPa) and HBO (pO 2 = 2.5 ATA = 0.25 MPa) through tissue oxygenation on ischemia-induced cell injury as measured by the release of lactate dehydrogenase. We found that HBO, but not NBO, reduced oxygen and glucose deprivation-induced cell injury, indicating that passive tissue oxygenation (i.e. without vascular support) of the brain parenchyma requires oxygen partial pressure higher than 1 ATA.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".