CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 48Sepsis Diagnosis and TreatmentRespiratory Support and MechanismsTrauma, Hemostasis, Coagulopathy, Resuscitation

The lung lesion in four different types of shock in rabbits

Cuevas, Peter·1972·Archives of Surgery
DOI 10.1001/archsurg.1972.04180030067015
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Endotoxemia was demonstrated in over 90% (28 of 30) of a series of animals subjected to one of four different types of refractory shock. Microscopic study of the lungs showed that the changes characteristic of the lung lesion in shock did not occur unless an endotoxemia developed and persisted until death. When pretreatment by inducing resistance to endotoxin or by intraintestinal administration of nonabsorbable antibiotics prevented the endotoxemia or converted a persistent to a transient endotoxemia, there was a corresponding reduction in the incidence of the lung lesion and the mortality.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/archsurg.1972.04180030067015

Cites

11 of 11 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The relation between gut bacterial burden and systemic injury in shock has been reported consistently across species, types of shock, and decades of rigorous inquiry.

    “This relation has been reported consistently across species (mice,90,93 rats,94 rabbits,89 and dogs87), types of shock (haemorrhage,87 sepsis,89 and ischaemia–reperfusion90), and decades of rigorous inquiry.”

    From The microbiome and critical illness (2016) · cites this paper as [89]

  • During severe systemic illness such as sepsis or haemorrhagic shock, the bacterial content of the gut determines the severity of systemic injury.

    “During severe systemic illness, such as sepsis or haemorrhagic shock, the bacterial content of the gut determines the severity of systemic injury”

    From The microbiome and critical illness (2016) · cites this paper as [89]

  • When the bacterial burden of the gut is minimised, either by pretreatment with enteric antibiotics or by use of germ-free animals, the inflammation and injury sustained by distal organs in shock is lessened.

    “When the bacterial burden of the gut is minimised, either by pretreatment with enteric antibiotics or by use of germ-free animals, the inflammation and injury sustained by distal organs in shock is lessened.”

    From The microbiome and critical illness (2016) · cites this paper as [89]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Cuevas, P.
Corresponding author
Cuevas, Peter
Venue
Archives of Surgery
Publisher
American Medical Association (AMA)
Published
1972-03-01
Volume
104
Issue
3
Pages
319
ISSN
0004-0010 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1001/archsurg.1972.04180030067015
OpenAlex
W2061028300
Cited by
48
References
11
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 1 · 2012: 1
FWCI
12.01
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Archives of Surgery (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Sepsis Diagnosis and Treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Respiratory Support and Mechanisms
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine › Trauma, Hemostasis, Coagulopathy, Resuscitation
Keywords
refractory shock, endotoxemia, lung lesions, endotoxin resistance, non-absorbable antibiotics, mortality, rabbits
MeSH terms
Animals, Bradykinin, Endotoxins, Escherichia coli, Kanamycin, Lung, Lung Diseases, Rabbits, Shock, Shock, Cardiogenic, Shock, Septic, Toxemia

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review