MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2030077110 · doi:10.1089/ten.2004.10.1046

Assessing Porcine Liver-Derived Biomatrix for Hepatic Tissue Engineering

2004· article· en· W2030077110 on OpenAlexaff
Paul Lin, Warren C. W. Chan, Stephen F. Badylak, Sangeeta N. Bhatia

Bibliographic record

VenueTissue Engineering · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Institute of Biomedical Imaging and BioengineeringNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsDecellularizationTissue engineeringHepatocyteScaffoldChemistryBiomedical engineeringConnective tissueBioartificial liver deviceRegeneration (biology)CollagenaseIn vitroCell biologyPathologyBiochemistryMedicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Acellular, biologically derived matrices such as small intestinal submucosa have been extensively utilized to induce tissue regeneration and remodeling of connective tissue, vascular grafts, and urinary bladder; however, decellularized scaffolds have not been explored for their potential utility in hepatic tissue engineering. In the case of both extracorporeal hepatocyte-based devices and implantable hepatocyte-scaffold tissue-engineered constructs, maintenance of hepatocellular function is of prime importance. In this study, we specifically explored decellularized, porcine, liver-derived biomatrix (LBM) as a bioresorbable scaffold for primary hepatocytes. Primary rat hepatocytes were cultured on LBM and compared with well-characterized hepatocyte culture models--double-gel cultures that promote maintenance of liver-specific functions for many weeks, and adsorbed collagen monolayers that lead to the rapid decline of hepatocellular function and viability. Hepatocytes were maintained for up to 45 days on LBM and liver-specific functions such as albumin synthesis, urea production, and P-450 IA1 activity were found to be significantly improved over adsorbed collagen cultures. Our data indicate that LBM may be a favorable alternative to existing scaffolds for tissue engineering in that it is bioresorbable, can be easily manipulated, and supports long-term hepatocellular functions in vitro.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations239
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTissue EngineeringSame topicTissue Engineering and Regenerative MedicineFrench-language works237,207