The simple sugars glucose and fructose share a common "sweet" taste quality mediated by the T1R2+T1R3 taste receptor. However, when given the opportunity to consume each sugar, rats learn to affectively discriminate between glucose and fructose on the basis of cephalic chemosensory cues. It has been proposed that glucose has a unique sensory property that becomes more hedonically positive through learning about the relatively more rewarding post-ingestive effects that are associated with glucose as compared to fructose. We tested this theory using intragastric (IG) infusions to manipulate the post-ingestive consequences of glucose and fructose consumption. Food-deprived rats with IG catheters repeatedly consumed multiple concentrations of glucose and fructose in separate sessions. For rats in the "Matched" group, each sugar was accompanied by IG infusion of the same sugar. For the "Mismatched" group, glucose consumption was accompanied by IG fructose, and vice versa. This condition gave rats orosensory experience with each sugar but precluded the differential post-ingestive consequences. Following training, avidity for each sugar was assessed in brief access and licking microstructure tests. The Matched group displayed more positive evaluation of glucose relative to fructose than the Mismatched group. A second experiment used a different concentration range and compared responses of the Matched and Mismatched groups to a control group kept naïve to the orosensory properties of sugar. Consistent with results from the first experiment, the Matched group, but not the Mismatched or Control group, displayed elevated licking responses to glucose. These experiments yield additional evidence that glucose and fructose have discriminable sensory properties and directly demonstrate that their different post-ingestive effects are responsible for the experience-dependent changes in the motivation for glucose versus fructose.

Sepsis and its treatment are the most common etiologies of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), which has a disturbing mortality rate. Sepsis management relies heavily on the introduction of resuscitative fluids. However, when fluids are paired with the circulating inflammatory mediators of sepsis, patients are prone to lung damage. Survivors of sepsis-induced ARDS become plagued with functional and/or psychological sequelae such as impaired memory, difficulty in concentrating, and decreased mental processing speed. Specific techniques can be implemented when diagnosing and treating elderly patients with sepsis to prevent the onset of ARDS, including bed elevation and early antibiotics. Additionally, albumin infusion may be beneficial; however, more research must be conducted. Finally, inflammatory mediators, including serum mannose biomarkers and extracellular histone therapy, show a promising avenue for future treatment. Although there is limited research on osteopathic manipulative medicine (OMT) on ARDS or sepsis-induced ARDS, OMT that focuses on alleviating rib and thoracic somatic dysfunctions has been used as an adjunct therapy to treat other respiratory diseases, such as pneumonia and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The results of these studies may garner interest in whether the use of OMT as an adjunct therapy may be beneficial for patients with ARDS or sepsis-induced ARDS. This paper is intended to review the current guidelines for sepsis and ARDS management in elderly patients to identify measures to prevent sepsis-induced ARDS.

Disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) is a serious syndrome characterized by the systemic activation of blood coagulation resulting in the thrombosis of vessels leading to organ dysfunction and severe bleeding. When physicians try to treat DIC, it is imperative to diagnose and treat the underlying conditions. Anyone can be affected by DIC, but vulnerable groups such as pediatric populations, pregnant women and the elderly may be at higher risk. In this review, the current literature on DIC in pregnancy, the pediatric population, and the elderly is reported. This review also highlights the similarities and differences in the etiology, clinical presentation, diagnosis, and management of DIC in the aforementioned groups (i.e., pediatrics, pregnant women, and the elderly). Findings from this study may help increase awareness about various presentations of DIC in these groups to facilitate rapid recognition of symptoms leading to correct diagnoses.