In vitro evaluation of a simulated pneumoperitoneum environment using carbon dioxide on canine transitional cell carcinoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Objective To assess the impact of a simulated CO2 pneumoperitoneum environment on the viability and proliferation of canine transitional cell carcinoma (TCC) cells in vitro. Study design In vitro study. Methods A control Madin‐Darby canine kidney (MDCK) cell line and 3 canine TCC cell lines were exposed to 100% CO2 at pressure of 0, 5, 10, or 15 mmHg for 2 hours by using an airtight chamber and a mechanical insufflator at 37°C. Culture media pH was measured. Viability and proliferation were assessed by using a resazurin assay and trypan blue dye, respectively. Results The pH in the media significantly decreased immediately after CO2 exposure but returned to normal within 1 hour. The viability of the cell lines was variably affected at the evaluated pressures. Insufflation pressure of 10 mmHg resulted in significantly decreased cell viability compared with control. The impact of 15 mmHg CO2 was comparable to 0 mmHg and control. CO2 insufflation pressure had no significant effects on proliferation up to 7 days postexposure. Conclusion/Clinical significance: A positive pressure CO2 environment significantly decreased the viability of TCC and MDCK cells under specific conditions without influencing their proliferation up to 7 days postexposure. Investigating these effects in clinical patients undergoing CO2 laparoscopy is essential to assess for port site metastasis or peritoneal carcinomatosis in order to translate these in vitro results to clinical recommendations.
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".