Hemocompatibility of Degrading Polymeric Biomaterials: Degradable Polar Hydrophobic Ionic Polyurethane versus Poly(lactic-<i>co</i>-glycolic) Acid
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The use of degradable polymers in vascular tissue regeneration has sparked the need to characterize polymer biocompatibility during degradation. While tissue compatibility has been frequently addressed, studies on polymer hemocompatibility during degradation are limited. The current study evaluated the differences in hemocompatibility (platelet response, complement activation, and coagulation cascade initiation) between as-made and hydrolyzed poly(lactic-co-glycolic) acid (PLGA) and degradable polar hydrophobic ionic polyurethane (D-PHI). Platelet activation decreased (in whole blood) and platelet adhesion decreased (in blood without leukocytes) for degraded versus as-made PLGA. D-PHI showed minimal hemocompatibility changes over degradation. Leukocytes played a major role in mediating platelet activation for samples and controls, as well as influencing platelet-polymer adhesion on the degraded materials. This study demonstrates the importance of assessing the blood compatibility of biomaterials over the course of degradation since the associated changes in surface chemistry and physical state could significantly change biomaterial hemocompatibility.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 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".