Porcine bladder acellular matrix (ACM): protein expression, mechanical properties
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Experimentally, porcine bladder acellular matrix (ACM) that mimics extracellular matrix has excellent potential as a bladder substitute. Herein we investigated the spatial localization and expression of different key cellular and extracellular proteins in the ACM; furthermore, we evaluated the inherent mechanical properties of the resultant ACM prior to implantation. Using a proprietary decellularization method, the DNA contents in both ACM and normal bladder were measured; in addition we used immunohistochemistry and western blots to quantify and localize the different cellular and extracellular components, and finally the mechanical testing was performed using a uniaxial mechanical testing machine. The mean DNA content in the ACM was significantly lower in the ACM compared to the bladder. Furthermore, the immunohistochemical and western blot analyses showed that collagen I and IV were preserved in the ACM, but possibly denatured collagen III in the ACM. Furthermore, elastin, laminin and fibronectin were mildly reduced in the ACM. Although the ACM did not exhibit nucleated cells, residual cellular components (actin, myosin, vimentin and others) were still present. There was, on the other hand, no significant difference in the mean stiffness between the ACM and the bladder. Although our decellularization method is effective in removing nuclear material from the bladder while maintaining its inherent mechanical properties, further work is mandatory to determine whether these residual DNA and cellular remnants would lead to any immune reaction, or if the mechanical properties of the ACM are preserved upon implantation and cellularization.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".