Angiotensin II type 2 receptor blocker PD123319 has more beneficial effects than losartan on ischemia–reperfusion injury and oxidative damage in isolated rat heart
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Our study aimed to determine the effects of losartan and PD123319 in ischemia–reperfusion (IR) injury in isolated perfused rat heart. The study used 40 male Wistar albino rats that were grouped as Control, IR, and IR treatment groups that received losartan (20 mg/kg), PD123319 (20 mg/kg), and losartan+PD123319. The hearts were attached to Langendorff isolated heart system by employing in situ cannulation method, and cardiodynamic parameters were recorded during the experiment. At the end of experiment, hearts were retained for biochemical analysis and all data were statistically evaluated. A partial recovery of cardiodynamic parameters was observed in all treatment groups. A significant increase in oxidative stress parameters were seen in the IR group, whereas all treatment groups exhibited lower increase. Furthermore, levels of all antioxidant parameters were significantly lower in the IR group, but higher in the treatment groups. Effects on all parameters were much more remarkable in the PD123319 group. Levels of angiotensin II and renin were increased (P < 0.001) with IR application and decreased (P < 0.001) with the treatment of both antagonists. In conclusion, treatment of losartan and PD123319 played a cardioprotective role against IR injury, PD123319 being more effective in this protection.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".