Comparison of High Cryoprotectant Concentrations for Cryopreservation of Porcine Articular Cartilage
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Large, untreated articular cartilage (AC) defects degenerate into osteoarthritis, and successful cryopreservation of AC may improve treatment outcomes. This study compared three cryoprotectant solutions (6 M dimethyl sulfoxide, 5 M propylene glycol, and a combination solution of 3.1 M dimethyl sulfoxide, 2.2 M propylene glycol, and 3.1 M formamide in phosphate-buffered saline) using a rapid-cooling protocol on intact, 10-mm-diameter, porcine osteochondral dowels. Fresh controls, toxicity controls, and experimental samples were examined using membrane integrity stains for intact chondrocyte recovery. The results of this study demonstrated that after rapid cooling and warming, the 6 M dimethyl sulfoxide (33 ± 2%) and 5 M propylene glycol (24 ± 2%) solutions had significantly higher recovery of intact cells than the combination solution (10 ± 2%). The chondrocytes in the superficial layer were the most significantly damaged in the toxicity controls, but after rapid cooling, the middle layer in all solutions demonstrated significantly higher recovery of intact cells than the superficial layer (likely because of toxicity) and the deep layer (likely because of inadequate cryoprotectant penetration). High concentrations of cryoprotectants with a rapid-cooling rate can cryopreserve intact AC with moderate recovery of intact cells.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".