ArticleClinical oral investigations2018
pH influences the biocompatibility of methylene blue solutions.
Article in Clinical oral investigations, 2018. 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.
- Viscous methylene blue formulation for antimicrobial photodynamic therapy in dentistry.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Breaking down antibiotic resistance in methicillin-resistantProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022Article
- Evaluation of antimicrobial photodynamic therapy with acidic methylene blue for the treatment of experimental periodontitis.PloS one · 2022Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe aim of this study was to investigate the biocompatibility of methylene blue at different pH levels through the method of implantation in subcutaneous tissue. MATERIALS AND
methodsEighty-four sterilized polyethylene tubes were allocated in the subcutaneous tissue of 28 rats, each one receiving four tubes, set into four groups: group tube (G-T)-empty tube, fibrin group (G-F)-tube filled with fibrin sponge, group methylene blue pH 7 (G-MB/pH 7)-tube filled with fibrin sponge soaked by methylene blue (100 μg/ml) at pH 7.0, and group methylene blue pH 1 (G-MB/pH 1)-tube filled with fibrin sponge and soaked by methylene blue (100 μg/ml) at pH 1.0. After 7, 15, and 30 days, seven animals from each group were euthanized, and the tubes involved by the surrounding tissue were removed and fixed with 4% buffered formaldehyde solution. The collected pieces were processed and histological sections (4 μm) were stained with hematoxylin and eosin and analyzed by light microscopy. Scores were assigned to analysis of histopathologic parameters. The results were statistically analyzed by the Kruskal-Wallis test (p ≤ 0.05).
resultsAt 7 and 30 days, the G-MB/pH 1 group showed no significant difference in the G-T control group, while G-MB/pH 7 had a significant increase on tissue reaction, also when compared to G-T. At 15 days, there was no statistical difference between the groups.
conclusionWithin the limits of this study, it is concluded that methylene blue at pH 1.0 provides better biocompatibility than at pH 7.0.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28536783What 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.