Tissue reactions of the rabbit urinary bladder to cadaveric human fascia lata and polypropylene surgical mesh.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate and compare histological tissue reactions of the urinary bladder to human cadaveric fascia lata (CFX) slings and synthetic mesh. METHODS: Thirty rabbits were randomized to three groups: group A (multifilament - Surgipro Mesh) 12 animals, group B (CFX) 12 animals, and group C (surgical controls) 6 animals. A piece of Mesh or CFX was fixed in direct contact with the anterior bladder neck wall. The control group simply underwent sham bladder manipulation. The animals were sacrificed at 6- and 12-week intervals, and their bladders were collected for histological analysis. RESULTS: Group A showed fibrosis within the detrusor of the bladder wall in half of specimens, including marked trans-mural inflammation in one case. The graft was incorporated within a plate of fibrous tissue with a foreign body-type granulomatous reaction to the synthetic material. In group B, no fibrosis or inflammation was seen within the bladder wall. The graft showed marked inflammation (mixed cell infiltrate) in all specimens, whereas foci of devitalized collagen with associated foreign body-type granulomatous changes and dystrophic calcification were present in more than half of specimens. No histopathological alteration was found in the control group. CONCLUSION: Significant histopathological changes within the bladder wall occur in response to synthetic mesh as compared to CFX over two tested time intervals. We believe these differences are related to the lack of reported adverse outcome with the use of cadaveric fascia lata slings in regard to graft erosion or infection when compared to complications occurring with the use of artificial materials.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".