The Effect of Fluid Loading and Hypertonic Saline Solution on Cortical Cerebral Microcirculation and Glycocalyx Integrity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Fluid loading and hyperosmolar solutions can modify the cortical brain microcirculation and the endothelial glycocalyx (EG). This study compared the short-term effects of liberal fluid loading with a restrictive fluid intake followed by osmotherapy with hypertonic saline (HTS) on cerebral cortical microcirculation and EG integrity in a rabbit craniotomy model. METHODS: The experimental rabbits were allocated randomly to receive either <2 mL/kg/h (group R, n=14) or 30 mL/kg/h (group L, n=14) of balanced isotonic fluids for 1 hour. Then, the animals were randomized to receive 5 mL/kg intravenous infusion of either 3.2% saline (group HTS, n=14) or 0.9% saline (group normal saline, n=13) in a 20-minute infusion. Microcirculation in the cerebral cortex based on sidestream dark-field imaging, a morphologic index of glycocalyx damage to sublingual and cortical brain microcirculation (the perfused boundary region), and serum syndecan-1 levels were evaluated. RESULTS: Lower cortical brain perfused small vessel density (P=0.0178), perfused vessel density (P=0.0286), and total vessel density (P=0.0447) were observed in group L, compared with group R. No differences were observed between the HTS and normal saline groups after osmotherapy. Cerebral perfused boundary region values (P=0.0692) and hematocrit-corrected serum syndecan-1 levels (P=0.0324) tended to be higher in group L than in group R animals. CONCLUSIONS: Liberal fluid loading was associated with altered cortical cerebral microcirculation and EG integrity parameters. The 3.2% saline treatment did not affect cortical cerebral microcirculation or EG integrity markers.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".