Detection of abnormalities in the superficial zone of cartilage repaired using a tissue engineered construct derived from synovial stem cells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study investigated the surface structure and mechanical properties of repair cartilage generated from a tissue engineered construct (TEC) derived from synovial mesenchymal stem cells at six months post-implantation compared to those of uninjured cartilage. TEC-mediated repair tissue was cartilaginous with Safranin O staining, and had comparable macro-scale compressive properties with uninjured cartilage. However, morphological assessments revealed that the superficial zone of TEC-mediated tissue was more fibrocartilage-like, in contrast to the middle or deep zones that were more hyaline cartilage-like with Safranin O staining. Histological scoring of the TEC-mediated tissue was significantly lower in the superficial zone than in the middle and deep zones. Scanning electron microscopy showed a thick tangential bundle of collagen fibres at the most superficial layer of uninjured cartilage, while no corresponding structure was detected at the surface of TEC-mediated tissue. Immunohistochemical analysis revealed that PRG4 was localised in the superficial area of uninjured cartilage, as well as the TEC-mediated tissue. Friction testing showed that the lubrication properties of the two tissues was similar, however, micro-indentation analysis revealed that the surface stiffness of the TEC-repair tissue was significantly lower than that of uninjured cartilage. Permeability testing indicated that the TEC-mediated tissue exhibited lower water retaining capacity than did uninjured cartilage, specifically at the superficial zone. Thus, TEC-mediated tissue exhibited compromised mechanical properties at the superficial zone, properties which need improvement in the future for maintenance of long term repair cartilage integrity.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".