Effects of Reuse and Bleach/Formaldehyde Reprocessing on Polysulfone and Polyamide Hemodialyzers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The surface features, morphology, and blood interactions of fibers from pristine, bleach/formaldehyde reprocessed, and reused Fresenius Polysulfone High Flux (Hemoflow F80B) hemodialyzers and Gambro Polyflux 21S Polyamide hemodialyzers have been studied. SEM images of fibers from both hemodialyzer types revealed a dense skin layer on the inner surface and a relatively thick porous layer on the outer surface. The 21S polyamide support layer consisted of interconnected highly porous structures. Environmental scanning electron microscopy and atomic force microscopy images of both membrane types showed alterations in morphology due to reprocessing and reuse; however the changes were more marked for the 21S polyamide dialyzers. Fluorescence microscopy images showed only minimal fluorescence associated with the fibers after patient use and reprocessing, suggesting that blood derived deposits were removed by processing. The protein layers formed on pristine and reused hemodialyzer membranes during clinical use were studied using SDS-PAGE and immunoblotting. Before bleach/formaldehyde treatment, protein layers of considerable amount and complexity were found on the blood side of singly and multiply used dialyzers. Proteins adsorbed on the dialysate side were predominantly in the molecular mass region below 30 kDa. However, some higher molecular mass proteins were detected on the dialysate side of the 21 S polyamide dialyzers. Very little protein was detected on dialyzers that were treated with bleach/formaldehyde after dialysis, regardless of whether they had been used/reprocessed once or 12 times.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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".