MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2029763097 · doi:10.1055/s-0032-1319927

Inquisition of the Human Intervertebral Disk Histopathology with the Use of Two Histological Staining Methods

2012· article· en· W2029763097 on OpenAlexaff
Catherine Ferland, Z. Shafiei, Rahul Gawri, Lisbet Haglund, Jean Ouellet, L. S. Stone

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Spine Journal · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStainingHistopathologyMedicineH&E stainParaformaldehydePathologySafraninDegeneration (medical)Intervertebral discPopulationAnatomyEosin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Chronic low back pain (LBP) affects over 10% of the adult population resulting in profound decreases in the quality of life. The intervertebral disk (IVD) is prone to degeneration which may contribute toLBP. To prevent disk degeneration-related LBP, better understanding of disk structure and the degenerative process is needed to understand the underlying mechanisms. Standard Hematoxylin and Eosin (H&E) staining, alone or in combination with other dyes, have been used to assess the normal biology and degeneration of IVDs. Recently, the multichromatic FAST (Alcian blue, Safranin-O, Fast green and Tartrazine) staining method has been developed (Leung V.Y.L. et al., 2009). This method provides additional information unavailable through conventional methods such as differentiation of the structures within the disk and identification of degenerative matrix remodeling through changes in the staining pattern. Although the FAST method has proved helpful in animal models to assess alteration of glycosaminoglycan content, its usefulness to assess human disk histopathology remains unknown. Materials and Methods Human disks were obtained (a) surgically from chronic LBP patients with moderate-severe disk degeneration or (b) postmortem from transplant donors. Disks were cut into quadrants, fixed in 4% paraformaldehyde with 14% (v/v) saturated picric acid for 3 days, embedded in OCT and stored at −80°C. Tissue samples were cut on a cryostat and transverse sections of 14 um and 20 um were obtained for H&E and FAST staining, respectively. Slides were coverslipped with DPX and scanned using a Zeiss MIRAX Scan Digital Slide Scanner for further examination. Results The FAST protocol creates high-resolution and polychromatic images of the general disk structure, and reveals the overall organization of the disk. The transition from the nucleus pulposus (NP) to the inner annulus fibrosus (IAF) and the outer annulus fibrosus (OAF) was clearly visible through color boundaries. Signs of degeneration could be observed with the FAST staining method in both IVDs obtained postmortem with no history of LBP and from chronic LBP patients. For example, FAST staining uncovered the loss of a clear boundary between the NP and the IAF that was not visible with H&E. These data suggest that relevant pathological details might be missed if assessing histological changes with the use of H&E only. Conclusion The combined use of H&E and FAST methods provides a more complete picture of the anatomy and physiology of human IVDs. The FAST profile distinguishes IVD compartments and shows matrix remodeling events within the disk, while H&E provides complementary information regarding the cellular content of the tissue. These two staining methods complement each other to give a clearer differentiation of IVD sub-regions of both normal and degenerated disk architecture. I confirm having declared any potential conflict of interest for all authors listed on this abstract Yes Disclosure of Interest None declared Leung V.Y.L. et al. Journal of Histochemistry and Cytochemistry 2009;57:249

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.003

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 head0.101
GPT teacher head0.404
Teacher spread0.303 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Spine JournalSame topicSpine and Intervertebral Disc PathologyFrench-language works237,207