Inhibition of gasotransmitters production and calcium influx affect cardiodynamic variables and cardiac oxidative stress in propofol-anesthetized male Wistar rats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It has been assumed that the cardioprotective effects of propofol are due to its non-anesthetic pleiotropic cardiac and vasodilator effects, in which gasotransmitters (NO, H2S, and CO) as well as calcium influx could be involved. The study on isolated rat heart was performed using 4 experimental groups (n = 7 in each): (1) bolus injection of propofol (100 mg/kg body mass, i.p.); (2) L-NAME (NO synthase inhibitor, 60 mg/kg body mass, i.p.) + propofol; (3) DL-PAG (H2S synthase inhibitor, 50 mg/kg body mass, i.p.) + propofol; (4) ZnPPIX (CO synthase inhibitor, 50 μmol/kg body mass, i.p.) + propofol. Before and after the verapamil (3 μmol/L) administration, cardiodynamic parameters were recorded (dp/dtmax, dp/dtmin, systolic left ventricular pressure, diastolic left ventricular pressure, heart rate, coronary flow), as well as coronary and cardiac oxidative stress parameters. The results showed significant increases of diastolic left ventricular pressure following NO and CO inhibition, but also increases of coronary flow following H2S and CO inhibition. Following verapamil administration, significant decreases of dp/dtmax were noted after NO and CO inhibition, then increase of diastolic left ventricular pressure following CO inhibition, and increase of coronary flow following NO, H2S, or CO inhibition. Oxidative stress markers were increased but catalase activity was significantly decreased in cardiac tissue. Gasotransmitters and calcium influx are involved in pleiotropic cardiovascular effects of propofol in male Wistar rats.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".