ReviewScientifica2013
Obstacles in haemocompatibility testing.
Review in Scientifica, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 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
33 citing papers in PubMed.
- Revisiting the tension-free paradigm: Axially prestretched elastomeric nanofibrillar grafts restore artery-like axial biomechanics in a preclinical model.Acta biomaterialia · 2026Article
- Hematologic complications and design challenges in cardiovascular devices.Communications engineering · 2026Review
- From Polyphenols to Prodrugs: Bridging the Blood-Brain Barrier with Nanomedicine and Neurotherapeutics.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Platelet-Rich Plasma from the Research to the Clinical Arena: A Journey Toward the Precision Regenerative Medicine.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Antithrombotic Polymers: A Narrative Review on Current and Future Strategies for Their Design, Synthesis, and Application.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Ultrasonic irradiation in the synthesis of nanohydroxyapatite: a chemically friendly technique for improving hemocompatibility and antibiofilm applications.Beilstein journal of nanotechnology · 2026Article
- Artesunate nanoliposome-hydrogel: a dual-modal therapy for post-surgical melanoma.Theranostics · 2026Article
- Chitosan-coated silver nanoparticles amplify glycopeptide efficacy againstFrontiers in microbiology · 2026Article
- Functionalization Strategies of Non-Isocyanate Polyurethanes (NIPUs): A Systematic Review of Mechanical and Biological Advances.Polymers · 2025Review
- Phytochemical Characterization and In Vitro Biological Activities ofMolecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Biocompatible ZnO nanoflower-infused chitosan/alginate/PVA composite for accelerated skin regeneration.Journal of materials science. Materials in medicine · 2025Article
- Dynamic blood compatibility assessment of coronary stents using an innovative pneumatic blood pump to generate physiological flow rates in small sample chambers.Journal of materials science. Materials in medicine · 2025Article
- ISO 10993-4 Compliant Hemocompatibility Evaluation of Gellan Gum Hybrid Hydrogels for Biomedical Applications.Gels (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Ex vivo validation of magnetically actuated intravascular untethered robots in a clinical setting.Communications engineering · 2024Article
- Article
- A Human Whole Blood Culture System Reveals Detailed Cytokine Release Profiles of Implant Materials.Medical devices (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2024Article
- How Crystallographic Orientation-Induced Fibrinogen Conformation Affects Platelet Adhesion and Activation on TiOAdvanced healthcare materials · 2023Article
- Article
- Endothelial Progenitor Cell-BasedFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2022Article
- Mitigation of Blood Borne Cell Attachment to Metal Implants through CD47-Derived Peptide Immobilization.Journal of visualized experiments : JoVE · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
ISO 10993-4 is an international standard describing the methods of testing of medical devices for interactions with blood for regulatory purpose. The complexity of blood responses to biomaterial surfaces and the variability of blood functions in different individuals and species pose difficulties in standardisation. Moreover, in vivo or in vitro testing, as well as the clinical relevance of certain findings, is still matter of debate. This review deals with the major remaining problems, including a brief explanation of surface interactions with blood, the current ISO 10993 requirements for testing, and the role of in vitro test models. The literature is reviewed on anticoagulation, shear rate, blood-air interfaces, incubation time, and the importance of evaluation of the surface area after blood contact. Two test categories deserve further attention: complement and platelet function, including the effects on platelets from adhesion proteins, venipuncture, and animal derived- blood. The material properties, hydrophilicity, and roughness, as well as reference materials, are discussed. Finally this review calls for completing the acceptance criteria in the ISO standard based on a panel of test results.
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.