ArticlePolymers2019
Preparation of a Cross-Linked Cartilage Acellular-Matrix Film and Its In Vivo Evaluation as an Antiadhesive Barrier.
Article in Polymers, 2019. 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.
- Preparation and Characterization of Extracellular Matrix Hydrogels Derived from Acellular Cartilage Tissue.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2022Article
- Preparation and Characterization of Antibacterial Porcine Acellular Dermal Matrices with High Performance.ACS omega · 2020Article
- Biomaterials to Prevent Post-Operative Adhesion.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this paper, a cartilage acellular-matrix (CAM) is chosen as a biomaterial for an effective antiadhesive barrier to apply between injured tissue and healthy tissues or organs. CAM is cross-linked using glutaraldehyde to create a cross-linked CAM (Cx-CAM) film. Cx-CAM has higher elastic modulus and toughness and more hydrophobic surface properties than CAM before cross-linking. Small intestinal submucosa (SIS), cross-linked SIS (Cx-SIS) as a negative control, and Seprafilm as a positive control are used in an experiment as adhesion barriers. Human umbilical vein endothelial cells (HUVECs) on SIS, Cx-SIS, or in a culture plate get attached and effectively proliferate for 7 days, but Cx-CAM and Seprafilm allow for little or no attachment and proliferation of HUVECs, thus manifesting antiadhesive and antiproliferative effects. In animals with surgical damage to the peritoneal wall and cecum, Cx-CAM and Seprafilm afford little adhesion and negligible inflammation after seven days, as confirmed by hematoxylin and eosin staining and macrophage staining, in contrast to an untreated-injury model, SIS, or Cx-SIS film. Cx-CAM significantly suppresses the formation of blood vessels between the peritoneal wall and cecum, as confirmed by CD31 staining. Overall, the newly designed Cx-CAM film works well as an antiadhesion barrier and has better anti-tissue adhesion efficiency.
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.