MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2160556465 · doi:10.1001/jamafacial.2014.617

Macroscopic In Vivo Imaging of Facial Nerve Regeneration in <i>Thy1</i> - <i>GFP</i> Rats

2014· article· en· W2160556465 on OpenAlexafffund
Eva Placheta, Matthew D. Wood, Christine Lafontaine, Manfred Frey, Tessa Gordon, Gregory H. Borschel

Bibliographic record

VenueJAMA Facial Plastic Surgery · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNerve injury and regeneration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoHospital for Sick Children
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsFacial nerveRegeneration (biology)Wallerian degenerationMedicineGreen fluorescent proteinAnatomyIn vivoNerve injuryCrush injuryEpineurial repairAxonPathologySurgeryBiologySciatic nerveCell biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

IMPORTANCE: Facial nerve injury leads to severe functional and aesthetic deficits. The transgenic Thy1-GFP rat is a new model for facial nerve injury and reconstruction research that will help improve clinical outcomes through translational facial nerve injury research. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether serial in vivo imaging of nerve regeneration in the transgenic rat model is possible, facial nerve regeneration was imaged under the main paradigms of facial nerve injury and reconstruction. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Fifteen male Thy1-GFP rats, which express green fluorescent protein (GFP) in their neural structures, were divided into 3 groups in the laboratory: crush-injury, direct repair, and cross-face nerve grafting (30-mm graft length). The distal nerve stump or nerve graft was predegenerated for 2 weeks. The facial nerve of the transgenic rats was serially imaged at the time of operation and after 2, 4, and 8 weeks of regeneration. The imaging was performed under a GFP-MDS-96/BN excitation stand (BLS Ltd). INTERVENTION OR EXPOSURE: Facial nerve injury. MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURE: Optical fluorescence of regenerating facial nerve axons. RESULTS: Serial in vivo imaging of the regeneration of GFP-positive axons in the Thy1-GFP rat model is possible. All animals survived the short imaging procedures well, and nerve regeneration was followed over clinically relevant distances. The predegeneration of the distal nerve stump or the cross-face nerve graft was, however, necessary to image the regeneration front at early time points. Crush injury was not suitable to sufficiently predegenerate the nerve (and to allow for degradation of the GFP through Wallerian degeneration). After direct repair, axons regenerated over the coaptation site in between 2 and 4 weeks. The GFP-positive nerve fibers reached the distal end of the 30-mm-long cross-face nervegrafts after 4 to 8 weeks of regeneration. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The time course of facial nerve regeneration was studied by serial in vivo imaging in the transgenic rat model. Nerve regeneration was followed over clinically relevant distances in a small number of experimental animals, as they were subsequently imaged at multiple time points. The Thy1-GFP rat model will help improve clinical outcomes of facial reanimation surgery through improving the knowledge of facial nerve regeneration after surgical procedures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: NA.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.229 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations21
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJAMA Facial Plastic SurgerySame topicNerve injury and regenerationFrench-language works237,207