Histopathological effects of fibrin glue on penile fracture in a rat model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate both histopathological effects and potential clinical application of fibrin glue on the penile cavernosal tissue. METHODS: Experimental penile fracture was formed by incising from the proximal dorsal side of the penis in 32 Wistar Albino rats. The rats were randomly assigned to four main groups of eight animals each. In the control group, the incision was not repaired and it was left to secondary healing. In the primary repair group, the incision was primarily repaired. In the fibrin glue group, glue was applied only to the incision. In the final group, fibrin glue was applied to the incision following primary repair. Three weeks later, penectomy tissue was examined histopathologically. RESULTS: When the control group was compared with primary repair+fibrin glue group, the differences in cavernous tissue healing with fibrosis and inflammation were statistically significant (p = 0.04 and 0.01, respectively). The primary repair+fibrin glue group, showed the best cavernous healing with fibrosis observed in only one rat. . There was no significant difference between the control group and the other groups according to cavernous tissue healing with fibrosis and inflammation (p = 0.11 and 0.12). Hyperemia was observed in the all groups of rats. CONCLUSIONS: Fibrin glue can be used in cavernoseal surgeries due to its adhesive and potentially anti-inflammatory features.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".