Self-cross-linkable hydrogels composed of partially oxidized alginate and gelatin for myocardial infarction repair
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Calcium cross-linked alginate hydrogel has shown positive results for the treatment of myocardial infarction in both acute and chronic rat models. However, cross-linked alginate hydrogels possess poor mechanical properties, uncontrollable degradation, and poor cell adhesion and infiltration. In this study, covalent cross-linking of partially oxidized alginate and gelatin hydrogel was developed for myocardial infarction treatment, as compared to cross-linked alginate hydrogel and saline. Specifically, the gelation process, mechanical properties, and biodegradation of both cross-linked alginate hydrogel and oxidized alginate and gelatin hydrogel were examined in vitro and in vivo; and a rat myocardial infarction model was developed by injecting hydrogel into hearts, and postinjection, echocardiography was performed at 2, 4, and 6 weeks, respectively. Matrix metalloprotease-2/9 activity was also examined by in situ zymography on frozen slices of the treated hearts. Based on the results, that both hydrogels enhanced scar thickness and attenuated heart remodeling compared with the saline control group and that, compared to cross-linked alginate hydrogel, oxidized alginate and gelatin hydrogel exhibited the increased mechanical strength, enhanced angiogenesis, and stronger cell-recruiting capacity. It has also been illustrated that oxidized alginate and gelatin hydrogel–treated hearts have much weaker cardiac remodeling, enhanced extracellular matrix accumulation, and reduced matrix metalloprotease activity than cross-linked alginate hydrogel–treated ones. All results suggest oxidized alginate and gelatin hydrogel may be more suitable for the myocardial infarction treatment.
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".