Surface endotoxin contamination and hemocompatibility evaluation of materials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To evaluate the blood compatibility of new materials, a clear distinction between properties of the materials and effects due to surface contamination by adsorbed endotoxins is essential. This study compares direct contact approaches and elution methods with water, organic solvents, nonionic, and zwitterionic detergents for determination of surface-adsorbed endotoxin by the limulus amoebocyte lysate (LAL) test and determines the blood compatibility of various surfaces with controlled endotoxin contamination in vitro. The LAL test in direct contact with an endotoxin-contaminated surface was concluded to be not practicable for most devices and its sensitivity showed a high dependence on surface characteristics. Among the elution methods, 0.2% Tween-20 showed most stable elution characteristics and appears therefore preferable. Biological reactions at in vitro blood exposure were found to be only minimally influenced by adsorbed endotoxin during the time window of 2 h, allowing for a straightforward discrimination between materials and endotoxin-dependent reactions.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.014 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 teacher head, 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".