ArticleACS applied materials & interfaces2010
In situ roughening of polymeric microstructures.
Article in ACS applied materials & interfaces, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Tailoring biomaterials for skin anti-aging.Materials today. Bio · 2024Review
- Considerations and recent advances in nanoscale interfaces with neuronal and cardiac networks.Applied physics reviews · 2021Review
- Electrophoretic cytometry of adherent cells.Lab on a chip · 2017Article
- Shape Memory Polymers Containing Higher Acrylate Content Display Increased Endothelial Cell Attachment.Polymers · 2017Article
- Highly efficient cellular cloning using Ferro-core Micropallet Arrays.Scientific reports · 2017Article
- Biocompatibility study of three distinct carbon pastes for application as electrode material in neural stimulations and recordings.Journal of materials science. Materials in medicine · 2017Article
- Microfabricated arrays for splitting and assay of clonal colonies.Analytical chemistry · 2012Article
- Patterning pallet arrays for cell selection based on high-resolution measurements of fluorescent biosensors.Analytica chimica acta · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
A method to perform in situ roughening of arrays of microstructures weakly adherent to an underlying substrate was presented. SU8, 1002F, and polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) microstructures were roughened by polishing with a particle slurry. The roughness and the percentage of dislodged or damaged microstructures was evaluated as a function of the roughening time for both SU8 and 1002F structures. A maximal RMS roughness of 7-18 nm for the surfaces was obtained within 15-30 s of polishing with the slurry. This represented a 4-9 fold increase in surface roughness relative to that of the native surface. Less than 0.8% of the microstructures on the array were removed or damaged after 5 min of polishing. Native and roughened arrays were assessed for their ability to support fibronectin adhesion and cell attachment and growth. The quantity of adherent fibronectin was increased on roughened arrays by two-fold over that on native arrays. Cell adhesion to the roughened surfaces was also increased compared to native surfaces. Surface roughening with the particle slurry also improved the ability to stamp molecules onto the substrate during microcontact printing. Roughening both the PDMS stamp and substrate resulted in up to a 20-fold improvement in the transfer of BSA-Alexa Fluor 647 from the stamp to the substrate. Thus roughening of micrometer-scale surfaces with a particle slurry increased the adhesion of biomolecules as well as cells to microstructures with little to no damage to largescale arrays of the structures.
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.