Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24039066›Full record

Trial reportJournal of biomedical materials research. Part B, Applied biomaterials2013

Effects of sterilization treatments on bulk and surface properties of nanocomposite biomaterials.

Maqsood Ahmed, Geoffrey Punshon, Arnold Darbyshire, Alexander M Seifalian

Open access · hybridAbstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of biomedical materials research. Part B, Applied biomaterials, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 66 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Effects of different sterilization methods on surface characteristics and biofilm formation on zirconia in vitro.Dental materials : official publication of the Academy of Dental Materials · 2018
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Maqsood AhmedCentre for Nanotechnology, Biomaterials & Tissue Engineering, Division of Surgery & Interventional Science, University College London, London, UK; Centre of Mathematics and Physics in the Life Sciences and Experimental Biology (CoMPLEX)), London, UK.
Geoffrey Punshon
Arnold Darbyshire
Alexander M Seifalian
London Centre for Nanotechnology · GBUniversity College London · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

With the continuous and expanding use of implantable biomaterials in a clinical setting, this study aims to elucidate the influence of sterilization techniques on the material surface and bulk properties of two polyurethane nanocomposite biomaterials. Both solid samples and porous membranes of nondegradable polyhedral oligomeric silsesquioxane poly(carbonate-urea) urethane (POSS-PCU) and a biodegradable poly(caprolactone-urea) urethane (POSS-PCL) were examined. Sterilization techniques included conventional steam sterilization (autoclaving), gamma irradiation, and disinfection via incubating with ethanol (EtOH) for 10 min or 24 h. After treatment, the samples were examined using gel permeation chromatography (GPC), attenuated total reflectance Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy, and tensiometry. Cytotoxicity was evaluated through the culture of endothelial progenitor cells and the efficacy of sterilization method was determined by incubating each sample in tryptone soya broth and fluid thioglycollate medium for cultivation of microorganisms. Although EtOH did not affect the material properties in any form, the samples were found to be nonsterile with microbial growth detected on each of the samples. Gamma irradiation was not only effective in sterilizing both POSS-PCU and POSS-PCL but also led to minor material degradation and displayed a cytotoxic effect on the cultured cells. Autoclaving was found to be the optimal sterilization technique for both solid and porous membranes of the nondegradable POSS-PCU samples as it was successful in sterilizing the samples, displayed no cytotoxic side effects and did not degrade the material. However, the biodegradable POSS-PCL was not able to withstand the harsh environment during autoclaving, resulting in it losing all structural integrity.

Indexed as

Biodegradable PlasticsMaterials TestingMembranes, ArtificialPolyurethanesSterilizationAdultCells, CulturedEndothelial CellsFemaleHumansMaleNanocompositesPorosityStem CellsBiodegradable PlasticsMembranes, ArtificialPolyurethanesBiomaterialspolymer degradationpolyurethanesterilization

Identifiers

PMID24039066
PMCPMC4228764
OpenAlexW1901959892

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.