ArticleJournal of functional biomaterials2017
Optimization of Bicomponent Electrospun Fibers for Therapeutic Use: Post-Treatments to Improve Chemical and Biological Stability.
Article in Journal of functional biomaterials, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of the Biological Response to Coating 3D-Printed PLA Scaffolds with Coaxial Gelatin-Based Electrospun Fibers.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Optimization of Diclofenac-Loaded Bicomponent Nanofibers: Effect of Gelatin on In Vitro and In Vivo Response.Pharmaceutics · 2024Article
- Green Routes for Bio-Fabrication in Biomedical and Pharmaceutical Applications.Pharmaceutics · 2023Review
- Wool Keratin Nanofibers for Bioinspired and Sustainable Use in Biomedical Field.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2022Review
- 3D Scaffolds Fabrication via Bicomponent Microgels Assembly: Process Optimization andMicromachines · 2022Article
- Article
- Article
- Short-Term Degradation of Bi-Component Electrospun Fibers: Qualitative and Quantitative Evaluations via AFM Analysis.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Bicomponent electrospun nanofibers based on the combination of synthetic (i.e., aliphatic polyesters such as polycaprolactone (PCL)) and natural proteins (i.e., gelatin) have been extensively investigated as temporary platforms to instruct cells by the release of molecular/pharmaceutical signals for the regeneration of several tissues. Here, water soluble proteins (i.e., gelatin), strictly embedded to PCL, act as carriers of bioactive molecules, thus improving bioavailability and supporting cell activities during in vitro regeneration. However, these proteins are rapidly digested by enzymes, locally produced by many different cell types, both in vitro and in vivo, with significant drawbacks in the control of molecular release. Hence, we have investigated three post-processing strategies based on the use of different crosslinking agents-(1-ethyl-3-(3-dimethylaminopropyl)carbodiimide hydrochloride) (EDC), glyceraldehyde (GC), and 1,4-butanediol diglycidyl ether (BDDGE)-to delay the dissolution time of gelatin macromolecules from bicomponent fibers. All of the qualitative (i.e., SEM, TGA) and quantitative (i.e., Trinitrobenzene sulfonate (TNBS) and bicinchoninic acid (BCA) assays) morphological/chemical analyses as well as biocompatibility assays indicate that EDC crosslinking improves the chemical stability of bicomponent fibers at 37 °C and provides a more efficient encapsulation and controlled sustained release of drug, thus resulting in the best post-treatment to design bio-inspired fibrous platforms for the extended in vitro release of drugs.
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.