MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1987657310 · doi:10.4103/0019-5154.110844

Comparison of intradermal injection of autologous epidermal cell suspension vs. spraying of these cells on dermabraded surface of skin of patients with post-burn hypopigmentation

2013· article· en· W1987657310 on OpenAlex
KhosraviMaharlooei Mohsen, Farsi Ali, Ahrari Sajjad, Monabati Ahmad, Mahsa Ghavipisheh, Rahnama Leila, Iman Ahrari, MohamadiAli Akbar

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIndian Journal of Dermatology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicWound Healing and Treatments
Canadian institutionsOntario GenomicsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDepigmentationMedicineHypopigmentationIntradermal injectionDermatologySuspension culturePathologyCell cultureImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: One of the most important complications after burning is hypo/depigmentation. This study was designed to compare two methods of cell spray and intradermal injection of epidermal cell suspension for treatment of burn induced hypopigmentation. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In this study, 28 patients with post burn hypo/depigmentation were selected and divided in 2 groups. A small skin biopsy was taken from normal skin of patients in operation room and epidermal cell suspension was prepared using NaBr 4N and trypsin. In the first group, the epidermal cell suspension was sprayed on the wound surface and then the area was dressed with amniotic membrane and gauze. In the second group, the cell suspension was injected in intradermal manner in the hypopigmented area. The patients were followed up and to evaluate the effect of the cells, photos were taken from the area before operation and also at follow-up. Clinical evaluation was done by the surgeon and a clinical score between "0" to "4" was used to demonstrate the clinical status from poor to excellent pigmentation. Skin biopsies were taken from depigmented area before and after interventions. Melanocytes were stained using anti S100 antibody and were counted in ×400 magnification fields. RESULTS: Eighteen patients were in cell spray and 10 were in cell injection groups. Mean change of pigmentation in two group showed that there was no statistical significant differences in pigmentation between two groups, (P value = 0.52) although a limited improvement in pigmentation status was observed in both groups. Regarding melanocyte numbers per field, there was not a significant difference between two groups and also before and after interventions, but melanocyte number increased after treatment in both groups. CONCLUSION: We did not find noticeable differences between cell spray and intradermal injection methods. Although both methods showed a limited effect on pigmentation of depigmented skin, the clinical results were not satisfactorily for both patients and clinicians.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.528
Threshold uncertainty score0.611

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.262 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it