The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Oncotic pressures opposing filtration across non‐fenestrated rat microvessels
Abstract
We hypothesized that ultrafiltrate crossing the luminal endothelial glycocalyx through infrequent discontinuities (gaps) in the tight junction (TJ) strand of endothelial clefts reduces albumin diffusive flux from tissue into the ‘protected region’ of the cleft on the luminal side of the TJ. Thus, the effective oncotic pressure difference (σ□π) opposing filtration is greater than that measured between lumen and interstitial fluid. To test this we measured σ□π across rat mesenteric microvessels perfused with albumin (50 mg ml−1) with and without interstitial albumin at the same concentration within a few micrometres of the endothelium as demonstrated by confocal microscopy. We found σ□π was near 70% of luminal oncotic pressure when the tissue concentration equalled that in the lumen. We determined size and frequency of TJ strand gaps in endothelial clefts using serial section electron microscopy. We found nine gaps in the reconstructed clefts having mean spacing of 3.59 μm and mean length of 315 nm. The mean depth of the TJ strand near gaps was 67 nm and the mean cleft path length from lumen to interstitium was 411 nm. With these parameters our three‐dimensional hydrodynamic model confirmed that fluid velocity was high at gaps in the TJ strand so that even at relatively low hydraulic pressures the albumin concentration on the tissue side of the glycocalyx was significantly lower than in the interstitium. The results conform to the hypothesis that colloid osmotic forces opposing filtration across non‐fenestrated continuous capillaries are developed across the endothelial glycocalyx and that the oncotic pressure of interstitial fluid does not directly determine fluid balance across microvascular endothelium.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Microvascular fluid exchange and the revised Starling principle
Levick, J. R., & Michel, C. C. (2010) · Cardiovascular Research · doi:10.1093/cvr/cvq062 · Cited by 1,183
Wiig, H., & Swartz, M. A. (2012) · Physiological Reviews · doi:10.1152/physrev.00037.2011 · Cited by 722
Overcoming the Blood–Brain Barrier: The Role of Nanomaterials in Treating Neurological Diseases
Furtado, D., Björnmalm, M., Ayton, S., Bush, A. I., Kempe, K., & Caruso, F. (2018) · Advanced Materials · doi:10.1002/adma.201801362 · Cited by 708
The endothelial glycocalyx: a review of the vascular barrier
Alphonsus, C. S., & Rodseth, R. N. (2014) · Anaesthesia · doi:10.1111/anae.12661 · Cited by 460
Therapeutic strategies targeting the endothelial glycocalyx: acute deficits, but great potential
Becker, B. F., Chappell, D., Bruegger, D., Annecke, T., & Jacob, M. (2010) · Cardiovascular Research · doi:10.1093/cvr/cvq137 · Cited by 438
Metadata
- Authors
- Adamson, R. H., Lenz, J. F., Zhang, X., Adamson, G. N., Weinbaum, S., & Curry, F. E.
- Venue
- The Journal of Physiology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2004-06
- Volume
- 557
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 889-907
- ISSN
- 0022-3751 (ISSN-L)
- 1469-7793
- OpenAlex
- W1570257195
- Cited by
- 323
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 7.37
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Oncotic pressures opposing filtration across non‐fenestrated rat microvessels. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1113/jphysiol.2003.058255
- The paper
- Adamson, R. H., Lenz, J. F., Zhang, X., Adamson, G. N., Weinbaum, S., & Curry, F. E. (2004). Oncotic pressures opposing filtration across non‐fenestrated rat microvessels. The Journal of Physiology. https://doi.org/10.1113/jphysiol.2003.058255
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.