Skin-specific mechanisms of body fluid regulation in hypertension
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Increasing evidence suggests excess skin Na+ accumulation in hypertension; however, the role of skin-specific mechanisms of local Na+/water regulation remains unclear. We investigated the association between measures of sweat and trans-epidermal water loss (TEWL) with Na+ content in the skin ([Na+]skin) and clinical characteristics in consecutive hypertensive patients. We obtained an iontophoretic pilocarpine-induced sweat sample, a skin punch biopsy for chemical analysis, and measures of TEWL from the upper limbs. Serum vascular endothelial growth factor-c (VEGF-c) and a reflectance measure of haemoglobin skin content served as surrogates of skin microvasculature. In our cohort (n = 90; age 21-86 years; females = 49%), sweat composition was independent of sex and BMI. Sweat Na+ concentration ([Na+]sweat) inversely correlated with [K+]sweat and was higher in patients on ACEIs/ARBs (P < 0.05). A positive association was found between [Na+]sweat and [Na+]skin, independent of sex, BMI, estimated Na+ intake and use of ACEi/ARBs (Padjusted = 0.025); both closely correlated with age (P < 0.01). Office DBP, but not SBP, inversely correlated with [Na+]sweat independent of other confounders (Padjusted = 0.03). Total sweat volume and Na+ loss were lower in patients with uncontrolled office BP (Padjusted < 0.005 for both); sweat volume also positively correlated with serum VEGF-c and TEWL. Lower TEWL was paralleled by lower skin haemoglobin content, which increased less after vasodilatory pilocarpine stimulation when BMI was higher (P = 0.010). In conclusion, measures of Na+ and water handling/regulation in the skin were associated with relevant clinical characteristics, systemic Na+ status and blood pressure values, suggesting a potential role of the skin in body-fluid homeostasis and therapeutic targeting of hypertension.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 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".