Novel Experimental Scoliosis Model in Immature Rat Using Nickel-Titanium Coil Spring
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN: Follow-up of animals after surgically initiated scoliosis. OBJECTIVE: To develop quantitatively asymmetric loads on rat lumbar to create scoliosis. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Current animal models for scoliosis use mostly rigid or flexible posterior asymmetric tethers. The curve progression can only be expected for the growth potential, leading to insufficient growth potential for validation of corrective techniques. METHODS: Scoliosis was induced in 55 five-week-old female Sprague-Dawley rats using a nickel-titanium coil spring. The experimental rats were randomly divided into 2 groups: in group A (n = 15), the nickel-titanium coil spring was not removed until these rats reached physical maturity (age, 12 wk). Group B (n = 40) was further randomly subdivided into 5 subgroups (n = 8 for each subgroup): removal of the spring after 1 week (group B1), 2 weeks (group B2), 3 weeks (group B3), 4 weeks (group B4), and 5 weeks (group B5). All rats were followed for a 7-week period with serial radiographs to document change of the deformity. RESULTS: All experimental animals of group A developed progressive, structural scoliotic curves convex to the left in the lumbar segment. In group B, the deformity of the lumbar progressed after the spring load was applied and regressed after the spring was removed. The scoliosis in group B1-B3 (the spring removed before sexual maturity) regressed after spring removal until the rats reached sexual maturity (4 wk after spring implant surgery). The scoliosis in group B4-B5 (the spring removed after sexual maturity) regressed only during the first week after spring removal surgery. The average coronal Cobb angle was 7.8° ± 1.3° (range: 6.0° -10.2°) in group B1 at the final follow-up, and there was only 1 experimental rat that maintained a curve more than 108. The models of group B2-B5 maintained stable scoliotic curves (coronal Cobb angle of L2-L5 > 10°) convex to the left in the lumbar segment at the final follow-up. CONCLUSION: This study establishes a rat lumbar scoliosis model via asymmetric load. This method develops lumbar scoliosis in a short time and maintains the essential elements along the curve. It is suitable for the investigation of scoliosis.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".