533 Preliminary in Vivo and Atomic Force Microscopy Assessment of Uninjured Skin, Donor and Graft Sites
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction With limited dermal function at the recipient site, fibrosis is expected following split-thickness skin grafting. Additional hypertrophic scar may develop within the graft, along seams and margins or at the donor site. This study focuses on the mechanical changes in the skin following split-thickness skin grafting as assessed by a non-invasive negative pressure device and atomic force microscopy to describe gross and sub-cellular mechanical properties in the differing skin states post-grafting. Methods Participants with full-thickness burn injuries acutely managed with a split-thickness skin graft, closed donor and graft sites without any previous steroid injection or laser therapeutic interventions and a suitable control site were recruited. A negative pressure device was applied to grafted, donor, and uninjured contralateral control sites and response recorded to vacuum pressure and release to calculate Young’s elasticity modulus. A 4mm punch biopsy was harvested from each labelled site and immediately processed using atomic force microscopy using silicon cantilevers conjugated with a spherical glass tip (radius 2.5 μm;) in a custom 3D printed frame to determine Young’s elasticity based on the Hertz fit model (fig 1a-b). Results A total of 5 participants (3 male, mean age 32.4 range 21-54, 152-427 days post-injury) have been recruited for the study thus far. Measurements were taken on the thigh of 4 participants and on the abdomen of 1. Atomic force microscopy data demonstrates lowest Young’s elasticity modulus (mean 1.49 ± 0.12 kPa) at the control sites (fig 1b graft 3: x-axis frequency, y-axis YM) with highest Young’s elasticity modulus (mean 2.70 ± 0.10 kPa) at the grafted sites. The donor sites are in the middle of the graft and control, (mean 1.98 ± 0.88 kPa). This trend is in concordance with clinical observation and elasticity probe measurement, where the graft is the toughest and the donor and control are similar (fig 1c). Conclusions Initial elasticity measurement by a non-invasive vacuum device has been in agreement with atomic force microscopy assessment. Further sampling is required to verify preliminary results, simulate resting tension in the skin and assess change following intervention. Applicability of Research to Practice Valid and reliable non-invasive measures will be informative of treatment effectiveness. Sub-cellular assessment of mechanical changes in skin graft and scar may direct therapeutic interventions.
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) | 0.005 | 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".