An efficient combination of a CPA loading protocol, metal container, and storage method for successful articular cartilage vitrification
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Successful cryopreservation of articular cartilage (AC) depends on a number of variables, including heat transfer, sample packaging for cryogenic storage, cryoprotectant agent (CPA) concentration (toxicity), and CPA permeation into AC. In the first experiment of the present study, we used a combination of our established vitrification protocol (430-min multi-step loading Protocol 8) and the metal Ovarian Tissue Cryosystem (OTC) as a closed vitrification-storage-rewarming container to vitrify 7-mm diameter porcine osteochondral dowels with 2 methods of storage (storage in the OTC with or without a surrounding vitrification solution). In the second experiment, in an attempt to introduce a more reproducible and safe vitrification protocol, we employed our successful Protocol 8 with the OTC as the CPA loading container and a cryobag as the storage container (with or without surrounding vitrification solution). In both experiments, post-warming normalized chondrocyte viabilities were assessed. The results of the first experiment demonstrated that a combination of the established step-wise CPA loading-vitrification-rewarming protocol (Protocol 8) with the metal OTC as the only container through all steps of CPA loading, vitrification, and rewarming produced a positive result. In the second experiment, combination of Protocol 8, the OTC as the CPA loading system and a cryobag as the storage container in both vitrified groups with or without solution resulted in high normalized chondrocyte viabilities (94.63 % and 96.17 %, respectively) post vitrification in 7-mm diameter porcine osteochondral dowels. Overall, this study demonstrated that by employing our established Protocol 8, using the metal OTC as a CPA loading container and a cryobag as the storage method we could achieve a reproducible method for clinical applications involving vitrified articular cartilage.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".