Clinical evaluation of performance, biocompatibility, and safety of vitamin E-bonded polysulfone membrane hemodialyzer compared to non-vitamin E-bonded hemodialyzer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The vitamin E-bonded polysulfone membrane hemodialyzer (ViE™-21) was evaluated in a clinical study for regulatory submission. Seventeen patients on hemodialysis were treated with conventional high-flux hemodialyzers for 2 weeks (Pre-ViE phase) and switched to the ViE-21 for 36 sessions (ViE phase) followed by an additional 2 weeks on conventional hemodialyzers (Post-ViE phase). Reduction ratios of urea, creatinine, beta-2-microglobulin, albumin, and ultrafiltration coefficients (KUF) were measured once during the Pre-ViE phase and twice during the ViE phase. Moreover, biocompatibility markers [leucocyte count, platelet count, and activated complement factor (C3a) levels] were evaluated pre-dialysis, 15 min after initiation, and post-dialysis. During the study, type and number of adverse events (AEs), and device malfunctions were recorded. ViE-21 reduction ratios and KUF were not noticeably different than those of conventional hemodialyzers. Fluctuations of leucocyte counts and C3a concentrations were similar using ViE-21 and conventional hemodialyzers; however, the platelet count fluctuation was lower in ViE-21 sessions. The frequency of episodes of hypotension occurring during the ViE phase was lower than that occurring during the Pre- and Post-ViE phases. In conclusion, this study provided performance and safety data of the ViE-21 for regulatory application. The data suggest that vitamin E-bonded hemodialyzers are beneficial in lowering platelet activation and frequency of intradialytic hypotension. Larger randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm these findings.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".