Bicarbonate treatment of acidosis produces paradoxical acidosis in the brain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Acidosis despite its origin is treated by quick correction of blood pH via bicarbonate infusion (NaHCO 3 ). However, NaHCO 3 treatment can worsen the acidotic condition in the cerebral spinal fluid (CSF). The objective was to determine the effect of rapid versus slow NaHCO 3 rates on paradoxical CSF acidosis in experimentally induced acidosis via DL‐lactic acid (DL‐LA) or hydrochloric acid (HCl). Nine calves (63±4kg, 27±5d) with atlanto‐occipital CSF, ear arterial and jugular venous catheters were infused with DL‐LA or HCl until severely acidotic (>12h). Acidotic calves were then treated with NaHCO 3 for 4h (rapid) or 24h (slow). Blood and CSF were collected at pre, post acidotic and during NaHCO 3 therapy, and assessed for acidotic state. Calves were also evaluated for neurological disturbances (ND). HCl and DL‐LA induced acidosis responded to NaHCO 3 (rapid & slow) with 54% pH recovery at 8h of treatment; however, paradoxical CSF was apparent during the first 4h in 3 groups (pH 7.23±0.09 or >15% drop at 2h) but not for DL‐LA (rapid). NaHCO 3 (rapid) increased CSF pCO 2 to 46±2 mmHg (p<0.05) with >75% recovery by 4h. NaHCO 3 was also effective in correcting CSF HCO 3 − (45%) in all except HCl (slow) group (10%) by 8h. Severe ND were present in DL‐LA induced acidosis, but not HCl (p<0.05), and these ND persisted during NaHCO 3 therapies. Overall NaHCO 3 regimens were clinically safe; however, they did not relieve ND caused by DL‐LA. Other treatments especially targeting the origin of acidosis need investigation. (Supported by NSERC Canada)
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) | 0.001 | 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".