MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2789522926 · doi:10.21037/aes.2018.ab085

AB085. E-beam sterilization of recombinant human collagen-phosphorylcholine corneal implants for transplantation

2018· article· en· W2789522926 on OpenAlexaff
Fiona Simpson, Elle Edin, Mohammed Mirazol Islam, Oleksiy Buznyk, Monika Ljunggren Kozak, Aneta Liszka, Kim Merrett, Håkan Per Fagerholm Gustafsson, May Griffith

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Eye Science · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntraocular Surgery and Lenses
Canadian institutionsHôpital Maisonneuve-Rosemont
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSterilization (economics)Materials scienceIrradiationBiomedical engineeringChemistryNuclear chemistryChromatographyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The sterilization of corneal implants composed of carbodiimide crosslinked recombinant human collagen type III (RHCIII) and phosphorylcholine polymers (RHCIII-MPC) is constrained by the biochemical properties of RHCIII. Early human trials used 1% chloroform in 0.1 M phosphate buffered saline (C-PBS), but require a stringent wash procedure with antibiotics to remove the chloroform. Irradiation with gamma or electron-beam (e-beam) allows a chemical-free sterilization method, but may result in crosslinking or denaturation. Here, electron-beam irradiation is evaluated as a sterilization method for RHCIII-MPC implants. Methods: Dose-finding study: RHCIII-MPC were cast in round, 350 µm thick, 12 mm diameter molds for corneal implants and 0.5 mm thick dumbbell-shaped molds for mechanical testing. The hydrogels received an irradiation dose of 17, 19, or 21 kGy and unirradiated controls were stored in C-PBS, n=3 per group. The hydrogels were tested for sterility and endotoxin, optical and mechanical properties, biodegradation, free radicals, and cell compatibility. Clinical evaluation in rabbits: RHCIII-MPC implants were e-beamed at 17 kGy or kept in C-PBS. One implant from each group was implanted into the right cornea of each rabbit by deep anterior lamellar keratoplasty, n=4 animals per group. Animals underwent preoperative and 6-month post-operative in vivo confocal microscopy (IVCM) to check nerve count and ingrowth of keratocytes. Corneal grafts and controls were assessed via histology and immunohistochemistry. Results: Dose finding study: hydrogels were sterile at all irradiation doses with no evidence of free radicals. There were no significant differences in optical or mechanical properties between the treatment groups and controls. All hydrogels supported cell growth. The 19 and 21 kGy implants had high collagenase degradation for 21 hours until they stabilized, whereas the 17 kGy and C-PBS implants had gradual degradation until 48 hours. Clinical results: the rabbits did not experience post-surgical inflammatory reactions and full epithelial coverage of the implants occurred within the first week of surgery for all animals. Mild neovascularization occurred in all animals, but resolved by 6-month follow-up. A mild 0.5–1.0 grade subepithelial haze was observed in all rabbits, but the implanted grafts remained transparent. Re-innervation occurred in all grafts with no significant differences between sterilization methods. All regenerated corneas had mucin production and were positive for cytokeratin 3 and 12. Grafted and control corneas were negative for macrophages and blood vessels. Conclusions: E-beam sterilization is a safe and effective form of sterilization for RHCIII-MPC implants.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.086
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.321 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of Eye ScienceSame topicIntraocular Surgery and LensesFrench-language works237,207