A gastrocnemius heterotopical transplant model with end-to-side neurorraphy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To present an animal model to assess the effects of end-to-side innervation in the heterotopically transplanted model with reduced chances of neural contamination. METHODS: The medial portion of the gastrocnemius muscle in wistar male rats was isolated and its pedicle dissected and performed a flap in the abdominal portion. To prevent neural contamination in the abdominal region, the muscle was wrapped with a Goretex(r) sheet. The specimens were divided into 2 groups (G). In G1 was performed an end-to-end suture between tibial nerve of the gastrocnemius and femoral motor nerve and between the saphenous sensory nerve and the motor nerve. In G2 was performed a end-to-side suture between the tibial nerve and the motor femoral and between the tibial nerve and saphenous motor nerve. The specimens were evaluated 60 days later to check the structure of the neurorraphy. Sections were obtained proximal and distal to the coaptation site. RESULTS: The medial gastrocnemius muscle had the advantage of maintaining visible mass after 60 days. No disruption of the coaptation site was found. No major injury to the donor nerve was seen in group 2. CONCLUSION: The proposed model is simple, reproduciple and prevent the neural contamination in the flap in end-to-side suture.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".