ArticleRegenerative biomaterials2015
Selectivity of biopolymer membranes using HepG2 cells.
Article in Regenerative biomaterials, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Mechanistic Insights into Moxifloxacin HCl Permeability from Nitrocellulose-Based In Situ Gels via Confocal Imaging and DFT Modeling.AAPS PharmSciTech · 2026Article
- Biaxial stretching of polytetrafluoroethylene in industrial scale to fabricate medical ePTFE membrane with node-fibril microstructure.Regenerative biomaterials · 2023Article
- Matrix stiffness and shear stresses modulate hepatocyte functions in a fibrotic liver sinusoidal model.American journal of physiology. Gastrointestinal and liver physiology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Bioartificial liver (BAL) system has emerged as an alternative treatment to bridge acute liver failure to either liver transplantation or liver regeneration. One of the main reasons that the efficacy of the current BAL systems was not convincing in clinical trials is attributed to the lack of friendly interface between the membrane and the hepatocytes in liver bioreactor, the core unit of BAL system. Here, we systematically compared the biological responses of hepatosarcoma HepG2 cells seeded on eight, commercially available biocompatible membranes made of acetyl cellulose-nitrocellulose mixed cellulose (CA-NC), acetyl cellulose (CA), nylon (JN), polypropylene (PP), nitrocellulose (NC), polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF), polycarbonate (PC) and polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE). Physicochemical analysis and mechanical tests indicated that CA, JN and PP membranes yield high adhesivity and reasonable compressive and/or tensile features with friendly surface topography for cell seeding. Cells prefer to adhere on CA, JN, PP or PTFE membranes with high proliferation rate in spheriod-like shape. Actin, albumin and cytokeratin 18 expressions are favorable for cells on CA or PP membrane, whereas protein filtration is consistent among all the eight membranes. These results further the understandings of cell growth, morphology and spreading, as well as protein filtration on distinct membranes in designing a liver bioreactor.
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.