MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3087712424 · doi:10.1016/j.exger.2020.111093

An acute estrogen receptor agonist enhances protective effects of cardioplegia in hearts from aging male and female mice

2020· article· en· W3087712424 on OpenAlexafffund
Anjali Ghimire, Susan E. Howlett

Bibliographic record

VenueExperimental Gerontology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMenopause: Health Impacts and Treatments
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNova Scotia Health Research Foundation
KeywordsAgonistEstrogenInternal medicineEstrogen receptorEndocrinologyMedicineReceptorPharmacology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The G-protein coupled estrogen receptor (GPER) mediates rapid responses to estrogen. GPER activation may contribute to cardioprotective effects of estrogen in ischemia and reperfusion, although whether it is beneficial in aging myocardium is unclear. We determined whether a GPER agonist (G1) added to standard cardioplegic solution (used to protect hearts from ischemia-reperfusion injury during cardiac surgery) would improve outcomes in isolated hearts from adult and aged mice of both sexes. METHODS: Hearts from young adult (6-9 mos) and older (22-28 mos) mice were perfused with Krebs-Henseleit buffer for 15 min (37 °C) followed by cold (6-7 °C) St. Thomas'2 cardioplegia with G1 (0.5 μM), G1 (0.5 μM) plus G15 (GPER antagonist; 1 μM) or vehicle for 6 min. Hearts were then subjected to global ischemia (90 min; 23-24 °C) and reperfusion (30 min; 37 °C). Infarct size was quantified with triphenyltetrazolium chloride. RESULTS: In adult females, left ventricular developed pressure (LVDP) recovered to only 45.1 ± 11.9% of baseline in control hearts in reperfusion, but recovered to 76.5 ± 3.9% with G1 treatment (p < 0.05) and this was blocked by G15. Similar results were obtained in older males and females (LVDP = 51.5 ± 10.6% vs. 84.8 ± 8.7% and 51.9 ± 5.5% vs. 90.0 ± 6.1% for older males and females, respectively; p < 0.05). By contrast, G1 had no effect on recovery of LVDP in hearts from adult males (26.6 ± 8.9% vs. 46.0 ± 14.2%). The rates of pressure development and decay showed a similar pattern of recovery in reperfusion. Infarcts were significantly smaller in G1-treated hearts from all older mice and in younger females, although G1 had no impact on infarct size in adult males (48.1 ± 7.7% for control vs. 32.6 ± 8.0% for G1). CONCLUSION: G1 enhances cardioprotective properties of a standard cardioplegic solution in the aging myocardium of both sexes. Supplementation of cardioplegic solutions with GPER agonists is a potential translational intervention that may improve cardiac surgery outcomes in older adults.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.629

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.315 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExperimental GerontologySame topicMenopause: Health Impacts and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207