Hypertonic Saline Resuscitation Modulates Neutrophil Adhesion Molecule Expression of Post-Traumatic Hemorrhagic Shock Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Context- Fluid resuscitation for traumatic hemorrhagic shock remains controversial since current protocols using large-volume crystalloid may exacerbate post-traumatic inflammation and organ dysfunction. Experimental data suggests that hypertonic saline/dextran (HSD, 7.5%NaCl in 6%dextran-70) exerts anti-inflammatory and immunomodulatory effects, reduces multiorgan dysfunction and improves outcome. Objective – First trial examining the immunomodulatory properties of HSD in humans. Based on experimental findings, this study proposes to determine whether a single bolus of HSD might modulate the inflammatory response to hemorrhagic shock. Design- Randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled clinical trial. Setting- Largest tertiary-care university-affiliated Trauma Centre in Canada. Patients- 27 adult patients, victims of blunt trauma and hypotension due to hemorrhage. 13 patients received HSD, 2 excluded for failing inclusion criteria and 1 for refusing participation. Intervention – Upon arrival, eligible patients received a single 250-ml bolus of either HSD or placebo (0.9%NaCl) from unmarked bags. Blood samples were collected prior to infusion and over subsequent 24 hours. All patients underwent standard resuscitation. Main Outcomes- HSD markedly altered shock-induced changes in key adhesion molecules on circulating neutrophils compared to placebo. HSD abolished shock-induced upregulation of CD11b and caused extensive CD62L shedding. Leukocyte counts were similar, except for lymphocytes where HSD
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 | 0.000 | 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".