ArticlePloS one2018
Selective abdominal venous congestion to investigate cardiorenal interactions in a rat model.
Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Controlled Mechanical Ventilation in Critically Ill Patients and the Potential Role of Venous Bagging in Acute Kidney Injury.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Renal venous congestion following hemorrhagic shock due to traumatic liver injury.CEN case reports · 2021Article
- Congestive nephropathy: a neglected entity? Proposal for diagnostic criteria and future perspectives.ESC heart failure · 2021Review
- Endurance Exercise Intervention Is Beneficial to Kidney Function in a Rat Model of Isolated Abdominal Venous Congestion: a Pilot Study.Journal of cardiovascular translational research · 2020Article
- Current animal models for the study of congestion in heart failure: an overview.Heart failure reviews · 2019Review
- Selective abdominal venous congestion induces adverse renal and hepatic morphological and functional alterations despite a preserved cardiac function.Scientific reports · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Abdominal congestion may play an important role in the cardiorenal syndrome and has been demonstrated to drive disease progression. An animal model for abdominal congestion, without other culprit mechanisms that are often present in patients such as low cardiac output or chronic kidney disease, might be interesting to allow a better study of the pathophysiology of the cardiorenal syndrome. The objective of this study was to develop a clinically relevant and valid rat model with abdominal venous congestion and without pre-existing heart and/or kidney dysfunction. To do so, a permanent surgical constriction (20 Gauge) of the thoracic inferior vena cava (IVC) was applied in male Sprague Dawley rats (IVCc, n = 7), which were compared to sham-operated rats (SHAM, n = 6). Twelve weeks after surgery, abdominal venous pressure (mean: 13.8 vs 4.9 mmHg, p < 0.01), plasma creatinine (p < 0.05), plasma cystatin c (p < 0.01), urinary albumin (p < 0.05), glomerular surface area (p < 0.01) and width of Bowman's space (p < 0.05) of the IVCc group were significantly increased compared to the SHAM group for a comparable absolute body weight between groups (559 vs 530g, respectively, p = 0.73). Conventional cardiac echocardiographic and hemodynamic parameters did not differ significantly between both groups, indicating that cardiac function was not compromised by the surgery. In conclusion, we demonstrate that constriction of the thoracic IVC in adult rats is feasible and significantly increases the abdominal venous pressure to a clinically relevant level, thereby inducing abdominal venous congestion.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.