A Novel Schlemm’s Canal Scaffold
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To assess the biocompatibility of a novel implant made of Nitinol (nickel-titanium alloy), designed to improve aqueous humor outflow. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In the first arm of biocompatibility testing, microstents were surgically inserted into Schlemm's canal (SC) of 2 non-human primates (NHPs), and a third NHP served as a surgical sham control. After 13 weeks the animals were killed, and the eyes were examined by light and scanning electron microscopy. Two masked investigators evaluated the histology sections. The second arm utilized 8 New Zealand white rabbits; each rabbit received a microstent inserted into the sclera and subconjunctival space by means of passage across the anterior chamber thus providing contact with several representative ocular tissues. The fellow eye of each rabbit underwent a sham procedure without microstent insertion. The rabbits were killed after 26 weeks, and a trained ocular pathologist examined the specimens using light microscopy. RESULTS: Histologic and scanning electron microscopy analysis of the NHPs demonstrated that the microstents were located in SC. There was no evidence of an acute or chronic inflammatory response, granulation response, or fibrosis in the outflow system or in adjacent tissues. Rabbit eyes showed minimal mononuclear cell infiltration and minimal fibrotic responses at the site of the implants when compared with sham-treated control eyes. CONCLUSIONS: The Hydrus Microstent was associated with minimal inflammation in both NHP and rabbit eyes with extended follow-up. These preclinical studies demonstrate that the Hydrus Microstent appears to have excellent long-term biocompatibility.
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".