Ultrasonographic assessment of the effect of metoclopramide, erythromycin, and exenatide on solid-phase gastric emptying in healthy cats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Available data on the effect of gastrointestinal motility-modifying drugs in cats are limited. Most recommendations for drug usage and dosage are based on collective clinical experience. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of metoclopramide, erythromycin, and exenatide on gastric emptying (GE) and gastric motility in comparison to placebo. We hypothesized that metoclopramide and erythromycin would have prokinetic gastric effects, whereas exenatide would prolong GE times and decrease the motility index (MI) of antral contractions. ANIMALS: Eight healthy domestic shorthair cats. METHODS: Each cat had 4 separate ultrasonographic assessments. In a prospective, randomized, double-blind, 4-way crossover design, cats received placebo, metoclopramide, erythromycin, or exenatide for 2 days followed by a minimum 5-day washout period. Ultrasonographic GE times and MI were compared to placebo. RESULTS: When compared to placebo, the rate of GE was significantly faster after administration of metoclopramide and erythromycin. Significant differences were found at all fractions of GE after administration of erythromycin and all but 1 fraction after metoclopramide when compared to placebo. The rate of GE in the first half of the GE curve was significantly slower after exenatide administration. The total area under the Ml curve was significantly larger after administration of metoclopramide and erythromycin than after placebo. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: Metoclopramide and erythromycin shorten GE times and increase the MI of antral contractions, thus having a prokinetic effect in the stomach of healthy cats, whereas exenatide causes an initial delay in GE.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".