ArticleJournal of materials science. Materials in medicine2018
Pericardial tissue for cardiovascular application: an in-vitro evaluation of established and advanced production processes.
Article in Journal of materials science. Materials in medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Targeted 2-Deoxy-D-Ribose Delivery by Biomimetic Nanoplatform Activates EGFR for Accelerated Heart Valve Endothelialization.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026Article
- Tissue requirements for the application of aortic valve neocuspidization - appropriate pericardium properties and homogeneity?Journal of materials science. Materials in medicine · 2024Article
- Biological Characterization of Human Autologous Pericardium Treated with the Ozaki Procedure for Aortic Valve Reconstruction.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
- Assessment of decellularized pericardial extracellular matrix and poly(propylene fumarate) biohybrid for small-diameter vascular graft applications.Acta biomaterialia · 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
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pericardial tissue is widely used as a biomaterial, especially for cardiovascular application. Tissue processing plays a key role in developing future scaffolds derived from biological material, yet standardized evaluation is still pending. This study presents a comprehensive assessment of different treatment protocols of bovine pericardium and compares those findings to commercially available decellularized bovine (CAB) and equine (CAE) pericardial patches. Native samples were fixed with glutaraldehyde (GA) or decellularized. These decellularized samples were subsequently either treated with GA (DEC-GA) or sterilized (DEC). Treatment effects were assessed by histological evaluation of structural and biomechanical properties. Furthermore, decellularization efficacy and accuracy of the applied sterilization protocol were evaluated. Cell seeding of processed pericardial samples with human endothelial cells constituted as biocompatibility test.GA-fixed tissue revealed structural deterioration, cytotoxicity and opposed to popular believe, GA-treatment did not lead to sterility of the samples. Biomechanical assessment revealed an increase in tensile strength of GA and a decrease of DEC and DEC-GA. DEC samples were successfully sterilized and showed good decellularization results, with a significant decrease in residual DNA. Comparative assessment revealed overall good results of CAE, yet results of CAB varied largely, e.g. decellularization efficacy or tissue thickness. Biocompatibility of DEC, CAB and CAE was confirmed by successful cell adhesion. Substantial differences of native tissue properties were observed, resulting in varying treatment efficacies. This study provides a first overview describing consequential variations among biomaterials and illustrates the necessity of multidimensional assessment and tissue quality management for biological scaffold development.
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.