ArticleBioactive materials2021
Evaluating the morphology of the degradation layer of pure magnesium
Article in Bioactive materials, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Research Progress on Personalized Bone Implants Based on Additive Manufacturing.Micromachines · 2025Review
- Best Practices in Developing a Workflow for Uncertainty Quantification for Modeling the Biodegradation of Mg-Based Implants.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2024Article
- Deep learning to overcome Zernike phase-contrast nanoCT artifacts for automated micro-nano porosity segmentation in bone.Journal of synchrotron radiation · 2024Article
- Development of a Bioreactor-Coupled Flow-Cell Setup for 3D In Situ Nanotomography of Mg Alloy Biodegradation.ACS applied materials & interfaces · 2023Article
- Radiofrequency induced heating of biodegradable orthopaedic screw implants during magnetic resonance imaging.Bioactive materials · 2023Article
- Optimizing the energy bandwidth for transmission full-field X-ray microscopy experiments.Journal of synchrotron radiation · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Magnesium is attractive for the application as a temporary bone implant due to its inherent biodegradability, non-toxicity and suitable mechanical properties. The degradation process of magnesium in physiological environments is complex and is thought to be a diffusion-limited transport problem. We use a multi-scale imaging approach using micro computed tomography and transmission X-ray microscopy (TXM) at resolutions below 40 nm. Thus, we are able to evaluate the nanoporosity of the degradation layer and infer its impact on the degradation process of pure magnesium in two physiological solutions. Magnesium samples were degraded in simulated body fluid (SBF) or Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium (DMEM) with 10% fetal bovine serum (FBS) for one to four weeks. TXM reveals the three-dimensional interconnected pore network within the degradation layer for both solutions. The pore network morphology and degradation layer composition are similar for all samples. By contrast, the degradation layer thickness in samples degraded in SBF was significantly higher and more inhomogeneous than in DMEM+10%FBS. Distinct features could be observed within the degradation layer of samples degraded in SBF, suggesting the formation of microgalvanic cells, which are not present in samples degraded in DMEM+10%FBS. The results suggest that the nanoporosity of the degradation layer and the resulting ion diffusion processes therein have a limited influence on the overall degradation process. This indicates that the influence of organic components on the dampening of the degradation rate by the suppression of microgalvanic degradation is much greater in the present study.
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.