Rat Model of Right-Sided Cardiac Remodeling and Arrhythmia using Pulmonary Artery Banding
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Clinical conditions, including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH), can lead to chronic right ventricle pressure overload and progressive right heart failure (RHF). RHF can be identified by right-sided cardiac hypertrophy and dilation associated with abnormal myocardial function affecting the RV and the right atrium (RA). We recently demonstrated that severe RHF is accompanied by an increased risk of atrial inflammation, atrial fibrosis, and atrial fibrillation (AF), the most common type of cardiac arrhythmia (CA). Recent studies have shown that RV and RA inflammation plays an important role in the arrhythmogenesis of CA, including AF. However, the impact of inflammation in the development of CA and AF in RHF is poorly described. Experimental models of RHF are required to better understand the association between right-sided myocardial inflammation and CA. The rat model of monocrotaline (MCT)-induced pulmonary hypertension (PH) is well-established to provoke RHF. However, MCT triggers severe pneumo-toxicity and pulmonary inflammation. Hence, MCT-induced RHF does not help to distinguish whether the subsequent myocardial inflammation originates from the RHF per se or circulating inflammatory signals secreted by the injured lung. In this article, a mechanical method involving pulmonary artery trunk banding (PAB) was used to provoke right-sided cardiac arrhythmogenesis. The PAB consists of performing a permanent suture of the pulmonary artery trunk for 3 weeks. Such an approach generates increased right-sided pressure overload. At D21 post-PAB, the suture results in hypertrophied, dilated, and inflamed RV and RA. The PAB-induced RHF is also accompanied by vulnerability to ventricular and atrial arrhythmias, including AF.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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".