Effect of chronic and progressive aortic constriction on renal function and structure in rats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the functional and structural renal damage observed in aortic-constricted hypertensive rats and to identify their possible relationship with transforming growth factor β (TGF-β) expression. Progressive renovascular hypertension was induced by progressive aortic constriction between the two renal arteries. Three months after constriction, the glomerular filtration rate (GFR), effective renal blood flow (ERBF), perfusion pressure (PP), urinary protein excretion (UPE) and urinary electrolyte excretion (UNaV and UKV) in the kidney above (right kidney, RK) and below the ligature (left kidney, LK) were measured. The cross-sectional corpuscular, capillary tuft and mesangial matrix area and tubulo-interstitial fibrosis were measured in tissue sections stained with Syrius Red using a computer-assisted image analysis system. TGF-β was detected by immunohistochemistry. The functional parameters were similar in the two kidneys of aortic-constricted hypertensive rats (GFR-RK, 1.33 ± 0.08 vs. LK, 1.18 ± 0.08 mL/min; ERBF-RK, 9.23 ± 1.32 vs. LK, 8.18 ± 0.91 mL/min; RVR-RK, 28.3 ± 3.9 vs. LK, 21.7 ± 3.2 mmHg·min/mL). The RK was subject to a higher PP than the LK (176 ± 7 vs. 128 ± 5 mmHg, P < 0.05). UPE, UNaV, and UKV were greater in the RK than in the LK (UPE-RK, 512 ± 61 vs. LK, 361 ± 38 µg/30 min, P < 0.05; UNaV-RK, 0.056 ± 0.012 vs. LK, 0.022 ± 0.006 mEq/30 min, P < 0.05; UKV-RK, 0.042 ± 0.006 vs. LK, 0.029 ± 0.003 mEq/30 min, P < 0.05). Morphometric analysis revealed that the RK capillary tuft area and mesangial matrix area were higher than those in the LK. The LK had a higher degree of interstitial fibrosis than the RK. No significant differences in TGF-β immunostaining were observed between the RK and the LK. In conclusion, the RK (subjected to hypertension) of aortic-constricted hypertensive animals developed glomerular fibrosis, only in the outer glomeruli whereas the LK developed mild interstitial fibrosis. Neither glomerular nor interstitial fibrosis seem to be responsible for the proteinuria observed in both kidneys.Key words: renovascular hypertension, renal fibrosis, rats, TGF-β.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".