Effect of ethanol/trisodium citrate lock on the mechanical properties of carbothane hemodialysis catheters
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: The objective of this study was to investigate the effect of three locking solutions on the mechanical properties of carbothane hemodialysis catheters. METHODS: Catheters were exposed in vitro to one of three locking solutions (heparin 5000 U/ml; 4% trisodium citrate (TSC) or 30% ethanol/4% TSC). Each solution was locked in six catheters and bathed at 37 degrees C for 9 weeks. Changes in the mechanical properties namely, force at break, elongation at break and elastic modulus of the catheters were determined by tensile testing. RESULTS: The ethanol/TSC lock has an effect on the properties of carbothane hemodialysis catheters. The force at break was significantly lower in the ethanol/TSC group compared to the heparin and TSC groups (113.26 N, 191.97 N and 229.72 N, respectively, p < 0.01). Similarly, elongation at break was lower in the ethanol/TSC group, compared to the heparin and TSC groups (stretched 21.97, 38.29, and 42.42 times original length respectively, p < 0.01). The elastic modulus was not significantly different. CONCLUSIONS: The effect of the ethanol/TSC lock on the catheters is unlikely to prohibit clinical use. After 9 weeks of exposure to the solution, the catheter segments could still be stretched to 22 times their length and withstand 11.5 kg (113 N) of force. Clinically produced forces during dialysis are many times smaller than the force required to break the catheters examined in this study. Therefore, the ethanol/TSC lock shows promise as a new catheter locking solution for the treatment of catheter-related infections. Further clinical studies are required.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".