↓ Skip to main content

Pulmonary Circulation Transvascular Fluid Fluxes Do Not Change during General Anesthesia in Dogs

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Physiology, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
8 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Pulmonary Circulation Transvascular Fluid Fluxes Do Not Change during General Anesthesia in Dogs
Published in
Frontiers in Physiology, February 2018
DOI 10.3389/fphys.2018.00124
Pubmed ID
Authors

Olga Frlic, Alenka Seliškar, Aleksandra Domanjko Petrič, Rok Blagus, George Heigenhauser, Modest Vengust

Abstract

General anesthesia (GA) can cause abnormal lung fluid redistribution. Pulmonary circulation transvascular fluid fluxes (J VA ) are attributed to changes in hydrostatic forces and erythrocyte volume (EV) regulation. Despite the very low hydraulic conductance of pulmonary microvasculature it is possible that GA may affect hydrostatic forces through changes in pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR), and EV through alteration of erythrocyte transmembrane ion fluxes ( ion J VA ). Furosemide (Fur) was also used because of its potential to affect pulmonary hydrostatic forces and ion J VA . A hypothesis was tested that J VA , with or without furosemide treatment, will not change with time during GA. Twenty dogs that underwent castration/ovariectomy were randomly assigned to Fur (n = 10) (4 mg/kg IV) or placebo treated group (Con, n = 10). Baseline arterial (BL) and mixed venous blood were sampled during GA just before treatment with Fur or placebo and then at 15, 30 and 45 min post-treatment. Cardiac output (Q) and pulmonary artery pressure (PAP) were measured. J VA and ion J VA were calculated from changes in plasma protein, hemoglobin, hematocrit, plasma and whole blood ions, and Q. Variables were analyzed using random intercept mixed model (P < 0.05). Data are expressed as means ± SE. Furosemide caused a significant volume depletion as evident from changes in plasma protein and hematocrit (P < 0.001). However; Q, PAP, and J VA were not affected by time or Fur, whereas erythrocyte fluid flux was affected by Fur (P = 0.03). Furosemide also affected erythrocyte transmembrane K+ and Cl-, and transvascular Cl- metabolism (P ≤ 0.05). No other erythrocyte transmembrane or transvascular ion fluxes were affected by time of GA or Fur. Our hypothesis was verified as J VA was not affected by GA or ion metabolism changes due to Fur treatment. Furosemide and 45 min of GA did not cause significant hydrostatic changes based on Q and PAP. Inhibition of Na+/K+/2Cl- cotransport caused by Fur treatment, which can alter EV regulation and J VA , was offset by the Jacobs Stewart cycle. The results of this study indicate that the Jacobs Stewart cycle/erythrocyte Cl- metabolism can also act as a safety factor for the stability of lung fluid redistribution preserving optimal diffusion distance across the blood gas barrier.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 8 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 8 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 2 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 13%
Professor 1 13%
Unknown 4 50%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 3 38%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 13%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 13%
Unknown 3 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 February 2018.
All research outputs
#20,466,701
of 23,025,074 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#9,487
of 13,773 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#292,724
of 331,231 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#250
of 354 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,025,074 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,773 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 331,231 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 354 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.