MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Direct evidence of a sympathetically‐mediated cardio‐inotropic response to baroreceptor unloading in rats

2022· article· en· W4225371931 on OpenAlexafffund
Liam Stewart, Liisa Wainman, Mehdi Ahmadian, Jennifer Duffy, Rudi Seethaler, Patrick J. Mueller, Neil D. Eves, Christopher R. West

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBaroreceptorInotropeMedicineInternal medicineHeart rateBlood pressure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rationale The baroreflex is a cardio‐autonomic reflex that is responsible for buffering acute oscillations in blood pressure. Contemporary evidence suggests that, when stimulated, baroreceptors activate a neural reflex arc via two efferent pathways: the vascular‐sympathetic arm to control peripheral resistance, and the cardio‐vagal arm to control heart rate. However, since sympathetic post‐ganglionic fibres innervate both the vasculature and left ventricle (LV) it follows that the heart may also contribute to hemodynamic regulation during baroreceptor unloading through alterations in cardiac inotropy, yet to our knowledge this has not been empirically tested using a load‐independent index of LV inotropy. Aim 1) To determine whether there is an increase in LV inotropy in response to baroreceptor unloading, and 2) to parse out whether this response occurs via sympathetic activation, parasympathetic withdrawal, or a combination of the two. Hypotheses There will be an increase in LV inotropy in response to baroreceptor unloading, and this response will occur via activation of the sympathetic nervous system. Methods 10 male Wistar rats were anesthetized (urethane) and instrumented with a LV pressure‐volume catheter to measure the maximal rate of pressure generation for a given end‐diastolic volume (dP/dt max –EDV mmHg·s ‐1 ·µl ‐1 ) as a load‐independent metric of cardiac inotropic function. Each rat was then placed in a customized servo‐controlled lower‐body negative pressure (LBNP) chamber that was programmed to reduce mean arterial pressure (MAP) by 10% for 60s to mechanically unload baroreceptors. The protocol was repeated in the same animal following infusions of lactated ringers (control), esmolol (β1 adrenergic receptor antagonist; blocks cardiac sympathetic transmission), atropine (muscarinic receptor antagonist; blocks cardiac parasympathetic transmission), and esmolol+atropine (full cardiac autonomic blockade). Between‐condition differences in LV inotropy were assessed using mixed‐models with Bonferroni corrected post‐hoc pairwise comparisons. Results Under control conditions, dP/dt max –EDV increased significantly (25.8±4.9 vs 29.9±6.7 mmHg·s ‐1 ·µl ‐1 ; p=0.002) during unloading. Sympathetic and full cardiac blockade significantly reduced baseline dP/dt max –EDV (10.8±2.1 and 13.5±3.0 mmHg·s ‐1 ·µl ‐1 , respectively; p<0.001 for both), and abolished the response to baroreceptor unloading (10.6±2.1 and 14.3±4.0 mmHg·s ‐1 ·µl ‐1 , respectively; p=0.999 for both). Parasympathetic blockade had no effect on baseline dP/dt max –EDV (26.1±5.5 mmHg·s ‐1 ·µl ‐1 ; p=0.999) and the increase in dP/dt max –EDV during baroreceptor unloading was maintained (30.5±8.3 mmHg·s ‐1 ·µl ‐1 ; p<0.001). Conclusion These results provide direct evidence of a sympathetically‐mediated increase in cardiac inotropic function in response to baroreceptor unloading in rats.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB JournalSame topicHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic ControlFrench-language works237,207