ArticleJournal of diabetes science and technology2013
Enhancing the sensitivity of needle-implantable electrochemical glucose sensors via surface rebuilding.
Article in Journal of diabetes science and technology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Electrochemical Detection of NO and CaPlasma chemistry and plasma processing · 2026Article
- Recent Progress and Challenges of Implantable Biodegradable Biosensors.Micromachines · 2024Review
- Biomedical Implants with Charge-Transfer Monitoring and Regulating Abilities.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2021Review
- In Vivo Chemical Sensors: Role of Biocompatibility on Performance and Utility.Analytical chemistry · 2017Review
- Article
- Novel molecular and nanosensors for in vivo sensing.Theranostics · 2013Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveNeedle-implantable sensors have shown to provide reliable continuous glucose monitoring for diabetes management. In order to reduce tissue injury during sensor implantation, there is a constant need for device size reduction, which imposes challenges in terms of sensitivity and reliability, as part of decreasing signal-to-noise and increasing layer complexity. Herein, we report sensitivity enhancement via electrochemical surface rebuilding of the working electrode (WE), which creates a three-dimensional nanoporous configuration with increased surface area.
methodsThe gold WE was electrochemically rebuilt to render its surface nanoporous followed by decoration with platinum nanoparticles. The efficacy of such process was studied using sensor sensitivity against hydrogen peroxide (H2O2). For glucose detection, the WE was further coated with five layers, namely, (1) polyphenol, (2) glucose oxidase, (3) polyurethane, (4) catalase, and (5) dexamethasone-releasing poly(vinyl alcohol)/poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid) composite. The amperometric response of the glucose sensor was noted in vitro and in vivo.
resultsScanning electron microscopy revealed that electrochemical rebuilding of the WE produced a nanoporous morphology that resulted in a 20-fold enhancement in H2O2 sensitivity, while retaining >98% selectivity. This afforded a 4-5-fold increase in overall glucose response of the glucose sensor when compared with a control sensor with no surface rebuilding and fittable only within an 18 G needle. The sensor was able to reproducibly track in vivo glycemic events, despite the large background currents typically encountered during animal testing.
conclusionEnhanced sensor performance in terms of sensitivity and large signal-to-noise ratio has been attained via electrochemical rebuilding of the WE. This approach also bypasses the need for conventional and nanostructured mediators currently employed to enhance sensor performance.
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.