Dialyzer characteristics are associated with differential effects on intradialytic microvascular tissue perfusion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: During hemodialysis (HD), microvascular perfusion is often compromised. These repeated ischemic insults can cause irreversible tissue damage in a variety of crucial organs. The role of dialyzer characteristics and general biocompatibility in this process is unknown. Clinical studies suggest a better biocompatibility profile for newer mid-cut-off (MCO) dialyzers when compared to conventional high-flux polysulfone (PSF). This study compared the effects of HD using either high-flux PSF or MCO dialyzers on microvascular perfusion in an established preclinical rat model of HD. Methods: HD using in-house manufactured mini-dialyzers was performed on 30 male Wistar Kyoto rats while simultaneously observing and quantifying microvascular perfusion in skeletal muscle using intravital microscopy. Results: HD using PSF dialyzers resulted in a significant reduction (25%) in microvascular perfusion, which was not found in HD using an MCO dialyzer. Blood pressure reduction was similar between the two groups, while the expected tachycardic response was better conserved in the MCO group. We found no difference in solute clearance or circulating electrolyte levels during the procedure. The mini-dialyzers effectively removed urea and creatinine, indicating the functionality of this experimental procedure. We observed increased plasma levels of C5b-9 following a PSF-HD, indicative of a higher bioactivation of the complement pathways. Conclusions: . Our results show that different dialyzer membranes have different effects on microvascular perfusion. Although our analysis suggests a potential role for complement activation, the mechanisms underlying these differences and their clinical significance require further study.
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) | 0.000 | 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".