Survival and Metabolic Function of Syngeneic Rat Islet Grafts Transplanted in the Omental Pouch
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many sites have been tested in an effort to identify the most ideal site to support islet function and viability. The aim of this study was to evaluate an omental pouch site for islet transplantation and compare it with the renal subcapsular space. All streptozotocine-induced diabetic rats receiving 2000 syngeneic islets in the omental pouch (n = 13) or under the kidney capsule (n = 10) returned to normoglycemia. At 7 days post-transplant and throughout the follow-up period, the mean blood glucose value in both groups was < 9.0 mM. At 4 and 8 weeks post-transplant, both groups displayed normal and similar glucose tolerance curves. Gain in the recipient's body weight after transplantation was similar between the two groups. At the end of follow up prompt hyperglycemia was observed in all rats after removal of the islet graft. No significant differences were found in the insulin contents of the harvested grafts, irrespective of the transplantation site. Histological examination of the grafts showed numerous well-granulated insulin-containing cells in both sites. The results indicate that the omental pouch is a viable site which offers a safe, convenient and efficacious alternative to the renal subcapsular space to transplant islets in rodents.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".