Effect of Intermittent Passive Stretching on Serial Sarcomere Loss Caused by Electrical Stimulation in Rabbit Triceps Surae Muscles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Most individuals with Cerebral Palsy suffer from muscle spasticity. These involuntarymuscular contractions are caused by lesions in the brain which develop intohypoextensibility of joints. In a previous study, Tabary and Tardieu found a 25% lossof serial sarcomeres in guinea pig Soleus over 12 hours of electrical stimulation1. Thusthe hypoextensibility seen in patients may be caused by a decrease in serial sarcomerenumbers due to the chronic electrical stimulation. A current method of treatment forspastic Cerebral Palsy patients includes a passive stretch protocol adapted for eachpatient. In order to observe the effect of passive stretching treatments we conducted anexperiment on a New Zealand White Rabbit animal model (n=4). The experimental legs’Medial Gastrocnemius, Plantaris, and Soleus muscles were electrically stimulated atthe tibial nerve for 10 hours (20 Hz, 1.5-4.5 V). The stretch protocol employed includeda 5 min stimulation free passive stretch period every 55 minutes that dorsi-flexed andplantar-flexed the ankle joint alternatively for 2 seconds. The contralateral leg was usedas a control where the tibial nerve was transected to prevent any stimulation cross-overeffects. At the end of the experimental period, rabbits were euthanized and the hindlimbs were prepared for analysis through a muscle fixation and connective tissuedigesting process. Fascicles were then teased out from the target muscles and mountedon slides. Fascicle lengths were measured by a camera and software system andsarcomere lengths were examined through laser diffraction. Results showed a 9.42.8%serial sarcomere loss in the Medial Gastrocnemius, a 3.53.3% loss in the Plantaris,and a 14.710.6% loss in the Soleus. These results indicate that serial sarcomere loss isnot eliminated, but prevented to a certain extent.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".