MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2991986036

Functional, Histomorphometrical and Immunohistochemical Assessment of Sciatic Nerve Regeneration through Inside-Out Vein Graft in Rat

2008· article· en· W2991986036 on OpenAlexaff
Rahim Mohammadi, Saeed Azizi, Nowruz Delirezh, Rahim Hobbenaghi, Keyvan Amini

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNerve injury and regeneration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSciatic nerveRegeneration (biology)VeinImmunohistochemistryPeripheral nerveAnatomyGluteal musclesSurgeryAnesthesiaInternal medicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective- Comprehensive functional, histomorphometrical and immunohistochemical assessment of sciatic nerve regeneration through an inside-out vein graft in rat. Design- Experimental in vivo study. Animals- Fifty- four healthy male White Albino rats. Procedures- The rats were divided into three experimental groups (n=18), randomly: Sham-operation (NC), Transected control (TC) and Inside-out vein graft (IOVG). In NC group after anesthesia the left sciatic nerve was exposed through a gluteal muscle incision and after careful homeostasis the muscle was sutured. In TC group the left sciatic nerve was exposed the same way, transected proximal to the tibio-peroneal bifurcation leaving a 10 mm gap. In IOVG group the left sciatic nerve was transected the same way and proximal and distal stumps were each inserted into an inside-out vein graft. Each group was further subdivided into three subgroups of six animals each and were studied 4, 8, 12 weeks after surgery. Results- Functional analysis showed significant improvement of nerve function in IOVG than in TC group (P < 0.05). Morphometric indices and immuohistochemistry indicated that there were significant differences (P < 0.05) between IOVG and TC groups 12 weeks after surgery. Conclusion and Clinical Relevance- Inside-out vein graft technique has offered the hope of providing a biological method for achieving the peripheral nerve regeneration in the least harmful way that is available, easily performed and affordable. It also averts the need for foreign materials that are likely to provoke a foreign body reaction.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

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)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.341
GPT teacher head0.530
Teacher spread0.189 · 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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)→Same topicNerve injury and regeneration→French-language works237,207→