In Vitro Elution of Tobramycin From Bioabsorbable Polycaprolactone Beads
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To compare the in vitro elution characteristics of tobramycin impregnated beads made of polycaprolactone (PCL) and polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA). DESIGN: Six-millimeter PCL and PMMA beads with 6% tobramycin were formed and placed in phosphate-buffered saline or newborn calf serum and incubated at room temperature or 37 degrees C. Aliquots were taken at intervals for eight weeks. Tobramycin levels were determined by fluorescent assay and antibacterial efficacy was assessed by measuring the zones of inhibition against Staphylococcus aureus and Pseudomonas aeruginosa on agar diffusion plates. RESULTS: Tobramycin elution rates at room temperature were similar up to three weeks. At three weeks, elution rates from PCL beads were twice those from PMMA beads, and at eight weeks, elution from PCL was quadruple that from PMMA. At 37 degrees C, tobramycin elution rates from PCL were eight times greater than those from PMMA by eight weeks. Total tobramycin eluted from PCL beads was 38.9% and 20% in PMMA beads. All samples showed bacteriostatic activity against S. aureus and P. aeruginosa at eight weeks. CONCLUSIONS: These in vitro results show that PCL has superior antibiotic elution characteristics compared with PMMA, and this may translate into a more effective antibiotic delivery vehicle. In addition, PCL is a bioabsorbable polymer, which may decrease the need for a second surgical procedure to remove retained beads.
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 | 0.001 | 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".