Comparison of Thyroid, Auricular, and Costal Cartilage Donor Sites for Laryngotracheal Reconstruction in an Animal Model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate and compare the use of autogenous thyroid cartilage with that of auricular and costal cartilage in laryngotracheoplasty (LTP). DESIGN: A blinded comparison of LTP techniques using anterior thyroid, auricular, or costal cartilage as graft material in a rabbit model. Histological and anatomical analyses were performed on the laryngeal specimens 1, 4, and 6 weeks after surgery. The following factors were analyzed in each specimen: graft viability, cartilage proliferation, perichondrial viability, degree of necrosis, inflammatory response, and degree of epithelialization. SUBJECTS: Fifty-seven New Zealand adult male rabbits, aged 6 months, were divided into 3 study groups (19 animals in each group) initially and equally into the 3 time periods. RESULTS: No episodes of respiratory compromise occurred in any of the animals in the 3 study groups. Gross inspection of the laryngotracheal complex in the thyroid cartilage group revealed no evidence of laryngeal structural compromise. There was no statistical difference between the 3 types of cartilage used for reconstruction for the variables of graft or perichondrial viability, degree of necrosis, or inflammatory response at 1, 4, or 6 weeks. Cartilage proliferation in the thyroid cartilage group was decreased compared with that in the other 2 groups at 1 week. The amount of proliferation increased in this group and was equal to the amount present in the other 2 groups 4 and 6 weeks after surgery. Complete epithelialization of the graft material was present in all 3 groups at 4 and 6 weeks after reconstruction. CONCLUSIONS: The use of autogenous thyroid cartilage for LTP compares favorably with that of other methods of reconstruction that use either auricular or costal cartilage in the rabbit model. This technique is a viable alternative for single-stage LTP and has the added advantage of using a single incision.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".