Given a passage with a context and an answer, construct a question on the basis of the information present in the passage. Construct the question in such a way that (i) it is unambiguous, (ii) it is answerable from the passage, (iii) its answer is unique (iv) it answer uses text phrases from the passage. Avoid creating questions that (i) can't be answered correctly without actually understanding the passage and (ii) uses the same words or phrases given in the passage.

Input: Consider Input: Context: Ischemic preconditioning (IPC) mitigates ischemia-reperfusion (I/R) injury in experimental models. However, the clinical significance of this protection has been unclear and a mortality reduction has not been previously reported in noncardiac models. This study examined the local and remote protection afforded by skeletal muscle IPC and sought to determine the significance of this protection on mortality.', "Mice subjected to 2 h hindlimb ischemia/24 h reperfusion (standard I/R injury) were compared with those undergoing a regimen of two 20-min cycles of IPC followed by standard I/R injury. Local injury was assessed via gastrocnemius histology, and remote injury was evaluated via intestinal histology and pulmonary neutrophil infiltration (n = 7). Mortality was compared in parallel groups for 1 week (n = 6). Groups were analyzed using an unpaired Student's t-test for gastrocnemius and pulmonary injury, and a Mann-Whitney rank sum test for intestinal injury. Mortality differences were interpreted through a hazard ratio.", 'Significant protection was observed in preconditioned animals. There was a 35% local injury reduction in skeletal muscle (71.2% versus 46.0%, P < 0.01), a 50% reduction in remote intestinal injury (2.3 versus 1.1, P < 0.01), and a 43% reduction in remote pulmonary injury (14.9 versus 8.5, P < 0.01) compared with standard injury controls. Preconditioned animals were also significantly protected from mortality, demonstrating a 66.7% survival at 1 wk compared with 0% survival after standard injury alone (hazard ratio 0.20, 95% CI: 0.02-0.59).
Answer: We have developed a murine model of IPC that demonstrates local and remote protection against I/R injury, and exhibits significant mortality reduction. This model demonstrates the powerful effect of IPC on local and remote tissues and will facilitate further study of potential mechanisms and therapies.

Output: Does ischemic preconditioning of skeletal muscle mitigate remote injury and mortality?

Input: Consider Input: Context: Kisspeptin and naloxone stimulate the reproductive axis while morphine inhibits its function. We have investigated the effect of central injection of kisspeptin-10 on mean plasma testosterone concentration in morphine or naloxone pretreated rats.', 'In this experimental study, 60 male Wistar rats that were divid- ed into 12 groups (n=5 per group) received saline, kisspeptin (1 nmol, ICV), naloxone (2 mg/kg, subcutaneously), morphine (5 or 10 mg/kg, sc) or co-administrations of kisspeptin, morphine and naloxone at 09:00 - 09:30. In the co-administrated groups, kisspeptin was injected 15 minutes following morphine or naloxone injections. Blood samples were collected 60 minutes following injections via the tail vein. Plasma testosterone concentration was measured by a rat testosterone ELISA kit.', 'Central injection of kisspeptin or subcutaneous injection of naloxone significantly increased the mean plasma testosterone concentration compared to saline while subcutaneous injections of different doses of morphine (5 or 10 mg/kg) significantly decreased testosterone compared to saline. The results revealed that morphine significantly attenuated the testosterone increase after kisspeptin injection compared to kisspeptin while a stimulatory additive effect was observed in the kisspeptin/naloxone group compared to either naloxone or kisspeptin.
Answer: Morphine and kisspeptin systems may interact with each other to control the hypothalamic-pituitary-gonadal (HPG) axis.

Output: Does morphine attenuate testosterone response to central injection of kisspeptin in male rats?

Input: Consider Input: Context: The aim of this study was to investigate whether renal sympathetic denervation (RSD) improves ventricular heart rate (HR) control in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation (AF).', 'Twenty-one patients (aged 57.5 10.2 years, 76.2% male) with persistent AF and hypertension underwent RSD and completed 7-days follow-up evaluations, including 24-hour Holter monitoring (Holter), blood pressure (BP), 24-hour ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM). Patients were grouped into tertiles of average HR at baseline Holter recording for evaluation of RSD effects on atrioventricular (AV) node (group 1: HR 90 bpm; group 2: 80 bpm HR < 90 bpm; group 3: HR < 80 bpm).', 'All patients successfully underwent RSD without any complications. The clinical and procedural characteristics were similar in all groups of patients. No significant changes in BP were observed in the three groups before and after RSD. Compared with baseline, the average HR (Holter) of patients in group 1, 2 and 3 had a reduction of 22.6 13.2 bpm (83.3 4.9 vs 106.0 14.6, P = 0.004), 9.7 7.8 bpm (75.7 7.6 vs 85.4 3.7, P = 0.017) and 2.3 2.9 bpm (71.4 4.0 vs 73.7 4.7, P = 0.089) at 7 days after RSD, respectively.
Answer: RSD could improve ventricular HR control in patients with persistent AF. RSD slowed AV node conduction in baseline HR-dependent manner. RSD may become an alternative non-pharmaceutical tool for rate control in patients with persistent AF.
Output: Does renal sympathetic denervation improve rate control in patients with symptomatic persistent atrial fibrillation and hypertension?