Repeated exposure to sucrose for procedural pain in mouse pups leads to long-term widespread brain alterations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Oral sucrose is administered routinely to reduce pain of minor procedures in premature infants and is recommended as standard care in international guidelines. No human or animal studies on effects of early repeated sucrose exposure on long-term brain development have been done in the context of pain. We evaluated the effects of repeated neonatal sucrose treatment before an intervention on long-term brain structure in mouse pups. Neonatal C57Bl/6J mice (n = 109) were randomly assigned to one of 2 treatments (vehicle vs sucrose) and one of 3 interventions (handling, touch, or needle-prick). Mice received 10 interventions daily from postnatal day 1 to 6 (P1-6). A dose of vehicle or 24% sucrose was given orally 2 minutes before each intervention. At P85-95, brains were scanned using a multichannel 7.0 T MRI. Volumes of 159 independent brain regions were obtained. Early repetitive sucrose exposure in mice (after correcting for whole brain volume and multiple comparisons) lead to smaller white matter volumes in the corpus callosum, stria terminalis, and fimbria (P < 0.0001). Cortical and subcortical gray matter was also affected by sucrose with smaller volumes of hippocampus and cerebellum (P < 0.0001). These significant changes in adult brain were found irrespective of the type of intervention in the neonatal period. This study provides the first evidence of long-term adverse effects of repetitive sucrose exposure and raises concerns for the use of this standard pain management practice during a period of rapid brain development in very preterm infants.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".