Impact of cerebral hypoperfusion–reperfusion on optic nerve integrity and visual function in the DBA/2J mouse model of glaucoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: One of the most important risk factors for developing a glaucomatous optic neuropathy is elevated intraocular pressure. Moreover, mechanisms such as altered perfusion have been postulated to injure the optical path. In a mouse model, we compare first negative effects of cerebral perfusion/reperfusion on the optic nerve structure versus alterations by elevated intraocular pressure. Second, we compare the alterations by isolated hypoperfusion-reperfusion and isolated intraocular pressure to the combination of both. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Mice were divided in four groups: (1) controls; (2) perfusion altered mice that underwent transient bi-common carotid artery occlusion (BCCAO) for 40 min; (3) glaucoma group (DBA/2J mice); (4) combined glaucoma and altered perfusion (DBA/2J mice with transient BCCAO). Optic nerve sections were stereologically examined 10-12 weeks after intervention. RESULTS: All experimental groups showed a decreased total axon number per optic nerve compared with controls. In DBA/2J and combined DBA/2J & BCCAO mice the significant decrease was roughly 50%, while BCCAO leaded to a 23% reduction of axon number, however reaching significance only in the direct t-test. The difference in axon number between BCCAO and both DBA/2J mice was almost 30%, lacking statistical significance due to a remarkably high variation in both DBA/2J groups. CONCLUSION: Elevated intraocular pressure in the DBA/2J mouse model of glaucoma leads to a much more pronounced optic nerve atrophy compared with transient forebrain hypoperfusion and reperfusion by BCCAO. A supposed worsening effect of an altered perfusion added to the pressure-related damage could not be detected.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".