<em></em> <i>In Vitro</i> Investigation of Gas Embolism in Microfluidic Networks Mimicking Microvasculature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gas embolism is a medical condition leading to the blockage of blood flow in the microvasculature by gas bubbles. While reported as rare, gas embolism often has devastating, fatal physiological consequences. Despite this acute importance, the genesis and evolution of air bubbles in blood vessels under different physiological conditions, such as blood viscosity and blood flow rate, is still understudied, largely because of difficult experimentation and in situ visualization. The objective of this work was to study the gas embolism phenomenon in vitro, using a microfluidic system that mimicked the architecture of microvasculature. The microfluidic systems comprised linear channels with two different air inlet types, namely, T- and Y-junctions with three different widths (20 µm, 40 µm, and 60 µm), and a 30 µm width honeycombed network with three bifurcation angles (30°, 60°, and 90°). Three synthetic liquids equivalent to 0%, 20%, and 46% hematocrit that mimicked the physiological blood viscosity and hematocrit concentrations were used. Our results show that: (i) 20 µm and 40 µm width channels had an elevated risk of gas embolism due to wide fluctuations in the total slug sizes; (ii) the resistance to the flow of air bubbles increased with the increase in the equivalent concentration of hematocrit; (iii) gas bubbles causing blockages and dampening of the flow velocity were frequently observed in 20 µm channels, and lastly (iv) increased risk of gas embolism was observed in the honeycomb architecture with 60° and 30° bifurcations. This work suggests that in vitro experimentation using microfluidic devices with microvascular tissue-like structures opens the possibility of studying this medical condition with high reproducibility and impacts the fact-based medical guidelines for preventing or mitigating iatrogenic occurrences.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".