Specific and Progressive Diaphragmatic Myopathy During the Development of Heart Failure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Respiratory dysfunction is a prominent feature of heart failure (HF) but remains to be fully understood. Our objective was to characterize diaphragmatic myopathy that manifests during the development of HF. Methods HF was induced in mice by transaortic constriction (TAC). Cardiorespiratory function was measured in vivo and diaphragm strips were used for histology and in vitro contractile function in mice at 2, 4 or 18 weeks TAC or in sham mice. Results In vivo respiratory frequency and pressure did not differ at any time point in anaesthetized animals suggesting absence of respiratory workload. In vitro force production was significantly elevated at 2 weeks (p<0.05) with a similar trend at 4 weeks; by 18 weeks, force production returned to sham levels. Indices of contractile performance (peak tension/time & dF/dt) at 2 and 4 weeks were significantly increased (p<0.05) and returned to sham levels by 18 weeks. Fatiguing stimulations revealed impaired relaxation at both 2 and 4 weeks TAC (p<0.05). Diaphragmatic atrophy (reduced cross sectional area) and fibrosis were evident at 4 weeks (p<0.05) and continued to develop by 18 weeks. Conclusions Diaphragmatic myopathy develops in the absence of increased workload and is demonstrated by contractile alterations, atrophy and fibrosis.
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) | 0.000 | 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".