Improved methods for acrylic-free implants in nonhuman primates for neuroscience research
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Traditionally, head fixation devices and recording cylinders have been implanted in nonhuman primates (NHP) using dental acrylic despite several shortcomings associated with acrylic. The use of more biocompatible materials such as titanium and PEEK is becoming more prevalent in NHP research. We describe a cost-effective set of procedures that maximizes the integration of headposts and recording cylinders with the animal’s tissues while reducing surgery time. Nine rhesus monkeys were implanted with titanium headposts, and one of these was also implanted with a recording chamber. In each case, a three-dimensional printed replica of the skull was created based on computerized tomography scans. The titanium feet of the headposts were shaped, and the skull thickness was measured preoperatively, reducing surgery time by up to 70%. The recording cylinder was manufactured to conform tightly to the skull, which was fastened to the skull with four screws and remained watertight for 8.5 mo. We quantified the amount of regression of the skin edge at the headpost. We found a large degree of variability in the timing and extent of skin regression that could not be explained by any single recorded factor. However, there was not a single case of bone exposure; although skin retracted from the titanium, skin also remained adhered to the skull adjacent to those regions. The headposts remained fully functional and free of complications for the experimental life of each animal, several of which are still participating in experiments more than 4 yr after implant. NEW & NOTEWORTHY Cranial implants are often necessary for performing neurophysiology research with nonhuman primates. We present methods for using three-dimensional printed monkey skulls to form and fabricate acrylic-free implants preoperatively to decrease surgery times and the risk of complications and increase the functional life of the implant. We focused on reducing costs, creating a feasible timeline, and ensuring compatibility with existing laboratory systems. We discuss the importance of using more biocompatible materials and enhancing osseointegration.
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 | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.006 |
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".