Polyester Arterial Grafts Impregnated with Cross-Linked Albumin: The Rate of Degradation of the Coating in vivo
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
One of the techniques used to avoid preclotting a porous textile arterial prosthesis is to coat the graft with a layer of a bioerodible polymer. The efficacy of this treatment is dependent in part on the rate at which the polymer degrades after implantation. The focus of this study was therefore to investigate the rate of in vivo degradation of albumin-coated polyester (Dacron)-knitted vascular prostheses. Two types of cross-linked albumin were included: one using glutaraldehyde, the other using carbodiimide as the cross-linking agent. Radioactively labeled albumin-coated prostheses were implanted in the thoracic aorta and peritoneal cavity of dogs, and their rates of biodegradation in vivo were monitored over a 4-week period. The rate of biodegradation was found to depend upon the site of implantation. It occurred more rapidly in the peritoneal cavity where less than 20% of the albumin coating remained after 4 weeks in vivo in comparison to the approximately 30% in the thoracic aorta. The nature and intensity of the cellular response appeared to be related to the cytotoxic potential of the cross-linking agent. Glutaraldehyde induced an inflammatory response and a delay in healing, whereas carbodiimide caused only a mild tissue reaction.
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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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