Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33219331›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2020

Comparing the permeability of human and porcine small intestinal mucus for particle transport studies.

Lukasz Krupa, Balazs Bajka, Robert Staroń, Didier Dupont, Harjinder Singh, Krzysztof Gutkowski, Adam Macierzanka

Open access · goldAbstract readVideo-Audio Media
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 60 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Porcine intestinal goblet cells: Guardians of mucosal immunity and barrier function.Animal nutrition (Zhongguo xu mu shou yi xue hui) · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. The role of goblet cells and mucus in intestinal homeostasis.Nature reviews. Gastroenterology & hepatology · 2022
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Generating anCellular and molecular bioengineering · 2022
    Article
  20. Article
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

7 authors at 5 institutions in 5 countries.

Lukasz KrupaDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology with Internal Disease Unit, Teaching Hospital No. 1, Chopina 2, 35-055, Rzeszów, Poland.
Balazs BajkaDepartment of Nutritional Sciences, King's College London, London, SE1 9NH, UK.
Robert StarońDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology with Internal Disease Unit, Teaching Hospital No. 1, Chopina 2, 35-055, Rzeszów, Poland.
Didier DupontSTLO, INRAE, Agrocampus Ouest, 35000, Rennes, France.
Harjinder SinghRiddet Institute, Massey University, Private Bag 11 222, Palmerston North, 4442, New Zealand.
Krzysztof GutkowskiDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology with Internal Disease Unit, Teaching Hospital No. 1, Chopina 2, 35-055, Rzeszów, Poland.
Adam MacierzankaSTLO, INRAE, Agrocampus Ouest, 35000, Rennes, France. adam.macierzanka@pg.edu.pl.ORCID 0000-0002-7403-4698
University of Rzeszów · PLGdańsk University of Technology · PLInstitut Agro Rennes-Angers · FRKing's College London · GBRiddet Institute · NZ

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The gastrointestinal mucus layer represents the last barrier between ingested food or orally administered pharmaceuticals and the mucosal epithelium. This complex gel structure plays an important role in the process of small intestinal absorption. It provides protection against hazardous particles such as bacteria but allows the passage of nutrients and drug molecules towards the intestinal epithelium. In scientific research, mucus from animal sources is usually used to simulate difficult-to-obtain human small intestinal mucus for investigating the intramucus transport of drug delivery systems or food nanoparticles. However, there is a lack of evidence the human mucus can be reliably substituted by animal counterparts for human-relevant transport models. In this report, a procedure for collecting human mucus has been described. More importantly, the permeability characteristics of human and porcine small intestinal mucus secretions to sub-micron sized particles have been compared under simulated intestinal conditions. Negatively charged, 500 nm latex beads were used in multiple-particle tracking experiments to examine the heterogeneity and penetrability of mucus from different sources. Diffusion of the probe particles in adult human ileal mucus and adult pig jejunal and ileal mucus revealed no significant differences in microstructural organisation or microviscosity between the three mucus types (P > 0.05). In contrast to this interspecies similarity, the intraspecies comparison of particle diffusivity in the mucus obtained from adult pigs vs. 2-week old piglets showed better penetrability of the piglet mucus. The mean Stokes-Einstein viscosity of the piglet jejunal mucus was approx. two times lower than the viscosity of the pig jejunal mucus (P < 0.05). All mucus structures were also visualised by scanning electron microscopy. This work validates the use of porcine small intestinal mucus collected from fully-grown pigs for studying colloidal transport of sub-micron sized particles in mucus under conditions mimicking the adult human small intestinal environment.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAge FactorsAnimalsAnimals, SucklingColloidsDiffusionDrug CarriersFemaleHumansIntestinal MucosaIntestine, SmallMaleMicroscopy, Electron, ScanningMiddle AgedModels, AnimalColloidsDrug Carriers

Identifiers

PMID33219331
PMCPMC7679454
OpenAlexW3099527489

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.