MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The effect of amorphous pyrophosphate on calcium phosphate cement resorption and bone generation

2013· article· en· W2003939998 on OpenAlexaff
Liam M. Grover, Adrian J. Wright, Uwe Gbureck, Aminat Bolarinwa, Jiangfeng Song, Yong Liu, David Farrar, Graeme I. Howling, J. Bruce Ralphin Rose, Jake E. Barralet

Bibliographic record

VenueBiomaterials · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBone Tissue Engineering Materials
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsPyrophosphatePhosphateCalciumCementMaterials scienceChemistryBiochemistryEnzymeMetallurgy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pyrophosphate ions are both inhibitors of HA formation and substrates for phosphatase enzymes. Unlike polyphosphates their hydrolysis results simultaneously in the complete loss of mineral formation inhibition and a localised elevation in orthophosphate ion concentration. Despite recent advances in our knowledge of the role of the pyrophosphate ion, very little is known about the effects of pyrophosphate on bone formation and even less is known about its local delivery. In this work we first developed a self setting pyrophosphate based calcium cement system with appropriate handling properties and then compared its in vivo degradation properties with those of a non-pyrophosphate containing control. Contrary to expectation, the presence of the pyrophosphate phase in the cement matrix did not inhibit mineralisation of the healing bone around the implant, but actually appeared to stimulate it. In vitro evidence suggested that enzymatic action accelerated dissolution of the inorganic pyrophosphate ions, causing a simultaneous loss of their mineralisation inhibition and a localised rise in supersaturation with respect to HA. This is thought to be a rare example of a biologically responsive inorganic material and these materials seem to be worthy of further investigation. Bioceramics to date have mainly been limited to orthophosphate, silicate and carbonate salts of calcium, here we report the successful application of a pyrophosphate material as a degradable osteoconductive bone repair cement.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.198 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations94
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiomaterialsSame topicBone Tissue Engineering MaterialsFrench-language works237,207