ArticleJournal of diabetes science and technology2008
A review of the biocompatibility of implantable devices: current challenges to overcome foreign body response.
Article in Journal of diabetes science and technology, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 119 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
119 citing papers in PubMed.
- Blood glucose self-monitoring with a long-term subconjunctival glucose sensor.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2013Trial
- Pilot study of a prototype minimally invasive intradermal continuous glucose monitor.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2012Trial
- Designing PEDOT:PSS hydrogels for bioelectronic interfaces.Materials today (Kidlington, England) · 2026Article
- Design, Construction, and Application of Implantable Fiber Biosensors.Advanced materials (Deerfield Beach, Fla.) · 2026Review
- A Methodological Approach to Assessing Biocompatibility: 3D Printing and Subcutaneous Implantation in Rats.ACS omega · 2026Article
- Smart Optogenetics for Real-Time Automated Control of Cardiac Electrical Activity.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026Article
- Smart microdevices for biomedical drug delivery: endogenous stimuli as the key to safer therapeutics.RSC advances · 2026Review
- Don't judge an implant by its cover: how the foreign body response and fibrotic capsule might be harnessed for good.npj biomedical innovations · 2026Review
- Extracellular matrix-modified helix-flexible nerve conduit with optimal mechanics and nerve regenerating properties.Materials today. Bio · 2025Article
- Ultraminiaturized neural implanted constructs display minimal immunologic response.Materials today. Bio · 2025Article
- Foldable 3D opto-electro array for optogenetic neuromodulation and physiology recording.Microsystems & nanoengineering · 2025Article
- Rethinking Biomedical Titanium Alloy Design: A Review of Challenges from Biological and Manufacturing Perspectives.Advanced healthcare materials · 2025Review
- Wearable Electrochemical Biosensors for Advanced Healthcare Monitoring.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025Review
- Design Characteristics of a Neoteric, Superhydrophilic, Mechanically Robust Hydrogel Engineered To Limit Fouling in the Ocular Environment.ACS omega · 2024Article
- Bicontinuous Interfacially Jammed Emulsion Gels (Bijels): Preparation, Control Strategies, and Derived Porous Materials.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Exploring the vast potentials and probable limitations of novel and nanostructured implantable drug delivery systems for cancer treatment.EXCLI journal · 2024Review
- The application of impantable sensors in the musculoskeletal system: a review.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2024Review
- Assessment of Bioprotect's Biodegradable Balloon System as a Rectal Spacer in Radiotherapy: An Animal Study on Tissue Response and Biocompatibility.Pharmaceutics · 2023Article
- Selective Infrared Neural Inhibition Can Be Reproduced by Resistive Heating.Neuromodulation : journal of the International Neuromodulation Society · 2023Article
- Ingestible pH sensing device for gastrointestinal health monitoring based on thread-based electrochemical sensors.Mikrochimica acta · 2023Article
59 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In recent years, a variety of devices (drug-eluting stents, artificial organs, biosensors, catheters, scaffolds for tissue engineering, heart valves, etc.) have been developed for implantation into patients. However, when such devices are implanted into the body, the body can react to these in a number of different ways. These reactions can result in an unexpected risk for patients. Therefore, it is important to assess and optimize the biocompatibility of implantable devices. To date, numerous strategies have been investigated to overcome body reactions induced by the implantation of devices. This review focuses on the foreign body response and the approaches that have been taken to overcome this. The biological response following device implantation and the methods for biocompatibility evaluation are summarized. Then the risks of implantable devices and the challenges to overcome these problems are introduced. Specifically, the challenges used to overcome the functional loss of glucose sensors, restenosis after stent implantation, and calcification induced by implantable devices are discussed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.