Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24186149›Full record

ArticleJournal of materials science. Materials in medicine2014

Preparation and evaluation of novel nano-bioglass/gelatin conduit for peripheral nerve regeneration.

Masoumeh Foroutan Koudehi, Abbas Ali Imani Fooladi, Kourosh Mansoori, Zahra Jamalpoor, Afsaneh Amiri, Mohammad Reza Nourani

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of materials science. Materials in medicine, 2014. 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
3.3field-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, 70 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Bioactive Materials for Soft Tissue Repair.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2021
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Natural-Based Biomaterials for Peripheral Nerve Injury Repair.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2020
    Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2014
    Article
  18. Review
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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Masoumeh Foroutan KoudehiTissue Engineering Division, Applied Biotechnology Research Center, Baqiyatallah University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Abbas Ali Imani Fooladi
Kourosh Mansoori
Zahra Jamalpoor
Afsaneh Amiri
Mohammad Reza Nourani
Baqiyatallah University of Medical Sciences · IRIran University of Medical Sciences · IRIslamic Azad University Central Tehran Branch · IRTehran University of Medical Sciences · IR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Peripheral nerves are exposed to physical injuries usually caused by trauma that may lead to a significant loss of sensory or motor functions and is considered as a serious health problem for societies today. This study was designed to develop a novel nano bioglass/gelatin conduit (BGGC) for the peripheral nerve regeneration. The bioglass nanoparticles were prepared by sol-gel technique and characterized using transmission electron microscopy (TEM), Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR) and X-ray diffraction analysis. The interfacial bonding interaction between the nano-bioglass and gelatin in the developed conduits was assessed by FTIR. The surface morphology and pore size of the nanocomposite were investigated through scanning electron microscopy with the pore size of the conduits being 10-40 μm. Biocompatibility was assessed by MTT assay which indicated the BGGC to have good cytocompatibility. The guidance channel was examined and used to regenerate a 10 mm gap in the right sciatic nerve of a male Wistar rat. Twenty rats were randomly divided into two experimental groups, one with the BGGC and the other being normal rats. The gastrocnemius muscle contractility was also examined at one, two and three months post-surgery in all groups using electromyography (EMAP). Histological and functional evaluation and the results obtained from electromyography indicated that at three months, nerve regeneration of the BGGC group was statistically equivalent to the normal group (p > 0.05). Our result suggests that the BGGC can be a suitable candidate for peripheral nerve repair.

Indexed as

CeramicsGelatinNanostructuresNerve RegenerationMicroscopy, ElectronPeripheral NervesSpectroscopy, Fourier Transform InfraredX-Ray DiffractionBioglassGelatin

Identifiers

PMID24186149
OpenAlexW2069494427

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.