Effects of unfocused extracorporeal shock wave therapy on healing of wounds of the distal portion of the forelimb in horses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine effects of extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) on healing of wounds in the distal portion of the forelimb in horses. ANIMALS: 6 horses. PROCEDURES: Five 6.25-cm2 superficial wounds were created over both third metacarpi of 6 horses. Forelimbs were randomly assigned to treatment (ESWT and bandage) or control (bandage only) groups. In treated limbs, each wound was treated with 625 shock wave pulses from an unfocused electrohydraulic shock wave generator. In control limbs, each wound received sham treatment. Wound appearance was recorded weekly as inflamed or healthy and scored for the amount of protruding granulation tissue. Standardized digital photographs were used to determine the area of neoepithelialization and absolute wound area. Biopsy was performed on 1 wound on each limb every week for 6 weeks to evaluate epithelialization, fibroplasia, neovascularization, and inflammation. Immunohistochemical staining for A smooth muscle actin was used to label myofibroblasts. RESULTS: Control wounds were 1.9 times as likely to appear inflamed, compared with treated wounds. Control wounds had significantly higher scores for exuberant granulation tissue. Treatment did not affect wound size or area of neoepithelialization. No significant difference was found for any of the histologic or immunohistochemical variables between groups. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Treatment with ESWT did not accelerate healing of equine distal limb wounds, but treated wounds had less exuberant granulation tissue and appeared healthier than controls. Therefore, ESWT may be useful to prevent exuberant granulation tissue formation and chronic inflammation of such wounds, but further studies are necessary before recommending ESWT for clinical application.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".