EXPERIENCE WITH INTEGRA® AT THE PRAGUE BURNS CENTRE 2002-2016.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Integra® dermal replacement has a wide spectrum of use both in burn medicine as well as in reconstructive plastic surgery and traumatology. Since 2002, it has been a part of surgical treatment of patients at Prague Burns Centre of the Královské Vinohrady Teaching Hospital. STUDY GROUP: Integra® was used in 47 patients in total between years 2002 and 2016. In this group there were 28 paediatric patients and 19 adult patients. Eleven children were operated during the reconstructive period, 8 children had an acute injury. There were 11 adult patients with Integra® applied within the trauma treatment, another 9 during reconstructive surgery. In 2016, we examined 11 patients treated by Integra®, at least 2 years ago. The average time since the application was 9 years. All examined patients had Integra® primarily applied to treat an acute injury. METHOD: Scars after the application of Integra® were compared with scars after dermoepidermal grafts (DE) in respective patients. Evaluation was performed on the basis of subjective and objective assessment by means of the modified Vancouver Scale (VSS). Samples were submitted for a histological and immunohistochemical analysis. RESULTS: Areas with Integra® coverage scored 1.4 points on average on the VSS. The scars after dermoepidermal graft scored 4 points on the same scale. Subjective assessment of functional and cosmetic quality of scars by patients was better in all cases in comparison to DE grafting. Notable differences were found between scars following Integra® application and those after DE grafting on histological assessment, namely in the organization and quality of collagen and elastin fibres as well as in tissue revascularization. CONCLUSION: The Integra® artificial skin replacement is a part of surgical strategy in management of extensive burn trauma and plays an important role in reconstructive surgery. The resulting scar quality when using Integra® seems to be better than in DE grafting both from an objective and subjective points of view..
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.003 |
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".