Vitrification of Intact Porcine Femoral Condyle Allografts Using an Optimized Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Successful preservation of articular cartilage will increase the availability of osteochondral allografts to treat articular cartilage defects. We compared the effects of 2 methods for storing cartilage tissues using 10-mm diameter osteochondral dowels or femoral condyles at -196°C: (a) storage with a surrounding vitrification solution versus (b) storage without a surrounding vitrification solution. We investigated the effects of 2 additives (chondroitin sulfate and ascorbic acid) for vitrification of articular cartilage. DESIGN: = 11) from sexually mature pigs were collected from a slaughterhouse within 6 hours after slaughtering. Dimethyl sulfoxide, ethylene glycol, and propylene glycol were permeated into porcine articular cartilage using an optimized 7-hour 3-step cryoprotectant permeation protocol. Chondrocyte viability was assessed by a cell membrane integrity stain and chondrocyte metabolic function was assessed by alamarBlue assay. Femoral condyles after vitrification were assessed by gross morphology for cartilage fractures. RESULTS: There were no differences in the chondrocyte viability (~70%) of 10-mm osteochondral dowels after vitrification with or without the surrounding vitrification solution. Chondrocyte viability in porcine femoral condyles was significantly higher after vitrification without the surrounding vitrification solution (~70%) compared to those with the surrounding vitrification solution (8% to 36%). Moreover, articular cartilage fractures were not seen in femoral condyles vitrified without surrounding vitrification solution compared to fractures seen in condyles with surrounding vitrification solution. CONCLUSIONS: Vitrification of femoral condyle allografts can be achieved by our optimized approach. Removing the surrounding vitrification solution is advantageous for vitrification outcomes of large size osteochondral allografts.
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) | 0.001 | 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".