Seven Consecutive Successful Clinical Islet Isolations with Pancreatic Ductal Injection
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Inconsistent islet isolation is one of the issues of clinical islet transplantation. In the current study, we applied ductal injection to improve the consistency of islet isolation. Seven islet isolations were performed with the ductal injection of ET-Kyoto solution (DI group) and eight islet isolations were performed without the ductal injection (standard group) using brain-dead donor pancreata. Isolated islets were evaluated based on the Edmonton protocol for transplantation. The DI group had significantly higher islet yields (588,566 +/- 64,319 vs. 354,836 +/- 89,649 IE, p < 0.01) and viability (97.3 +/- 1.2% vs. 92.6 +/- 1.2%, p < 0.02) compared with the standard group. All seven isolated islet preparations in the DI group (100%), versus only three out of eight isolated islet preparations (38%) in the standard group met transplantation criteria. The islets from the DI group were transplanted into three type 1 diabetic patients and all three patients became insulin independent. Ductal injection significantly improved quantity and quality of isolated islets and resulted in high success rate of clinical islet transplantation. This simple modification will reduce the risk of failure of clinical islet isolation.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it