Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28797120›Full record

ArticlePloS one2017

Medication eluting devices for the field of OBGYN (MEDOBGYN): 3D printed biodegradable hormone eluting constructs, a proof of concept study.

Karthik Tappa, Udayabhanu Jammalamadaka, David H Ballard, Todd Bruno, Marissa R Israel, Harika Vemula, J Mark Meacham, David K Mills, Pamela K Woodard, Jeffery A Weisman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
44citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

44 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. 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

10 authors.

Karthik TappaMallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America.
Udayabhanu JammalamadakaMallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America.
David H BallardMallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7470-3364
Todd BrunoDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Louisiana State University Health Shreveport, Shreveport, Louisiana, United States of America.
Marissa R IsraelDepartment of Pharmacy, St. Louis University Hospital, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America.
Harika VemulaPharmaceutical Sciences and Chemistry, University of Missouri- Kansas City, Kansas City, Missouri, United States of America.
J Mark MeachamDepartment of Mechanical Engineering & Materials Science, Washington University, St Louis, Missouri, United States of America.
David K MillsDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Louisiana Tech University, Ruston, Louisiana, United States of America.
Pamela K WoodardMallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America.
Jeffery A WeismanDepartment of Anesthesiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Missouri, United States of America.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

3D printing has the potential to deliver personalized implants and devices for obstetric and gynecologic applications. The aim of this study is to engineer customizable and biodegradable 3D printed implant materials that can elute estrogen and/or progesterone. All 3D constructs were printed using polycaprolactone (PCL) biodegradable polymer laden with estrogen or progesterone and were subjected to hormone-release profile studies using ELISA kits. Material thermal properties were tested using thermogravimetric analysis and differential scanning calorimetry. The 3D printed constructs showed extended hormonal release over a one week period. Cytocompatibility and bioactivity were assessed using a luciferase assay. The hormone-laden 3D printed constructs demonstrated an increase in luciferase activity and without any deleterious effects. Thermal properties of the PCL and hormones showed degradation temperatures above that of the temperature used in the additive manufacturing process-suggesting that 3D printing can be achieved below the degradation temperatures of the hormones. Sample constructs in the shape of surgical meshes, subdermal rods, intrauterine devices and pessaries were designed and printed. 3D printing of estrogen and progesterone-eluting constructs was feasible in this proof of concept study. These custom designs have the potential to act as a form of personalized medicine for drug delivery and optimized fit based on patient-specific anatomy.

Indexed as

Absorbable ImplantsBiocompatible MaterialsDrug Delivery SystemsEquipment DesignEstrogensFemaleHumansIntrauterine Devices, MedicatedPessariesPolyestersPrinting, Three-DimensionalProgesteroneSurgical MeshBiocompatible MaterialsEstrogenspolycaprolactonePolyestersProgesterone

Identifiers

PMID28797120
PMCPMC5552136

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.