Exploration into practical significance of integral water permeability of textile vascular grafts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Water permeability of textile vascular grafts has been considered as a key indicator for predicting blood permeability after implantation. However, a correlation between water and blood permeability has not been established yet. Therefore, even though the water permeability of a vascular graft can be tested according to the standard ISO 7198, the results fail to guide a manufacturer or a surgeon to judge whether this vascular graft needs pre-clotting or not prior to implantation. As a result, all commercial graft products show almost zero water permeability, which leads to the loss of advantages that textile vascular grafts have the pore size-controlled porous wall. To solve this problem, four types of woven vascular grafts were designed and manufactured in the present work. Then their permeability to water, simulated plasma, and anticoagulated whole blood were measured at graded pressures from 8 to 16 kPa. Moreover, the correlations among the water permeability, the simulated plasma permeability, and the anticoagulated whole blood permeability were established. The results suggest that relatively steady correlations exist between the water permeability and the anticoagulated whole blood permeability, and that the evaluation of the blood permeability using the water permeability is feasible and objective. The present work provides a quantitative method for evaluating the blood permeability using the water permeability, and the latter is thus endowed with practical significance for guiding designs and clinical pre-clotting operations of textiles vascular grafts.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".