Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34027233›Full record

ArticleBioactive materials2021

Zn-Mg and Zn-Cu alloys for stenting applications: From nanoscale mechanical characterization to

Claudia García-Mintegui, Laura Catalina Córdoba, Judit Buxadera-Palomero, Andrea Marquina, Emilio Jiménez-Piqué, Maria-Pau Ginebra, José Luis Cortina, Marta Pegueroles

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

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 26 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed
7.1field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 119 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Research status and prospects of biodegradable magnesium-based metal guided bone regeneration membranes.Hua xi kou qiang yi xue za zhi = Huaxi kouqiang yixue zazhi = West China journal of stomatology · 2024
    Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. 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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Claudia García-MinteguiBiomaterials, Biomechanics and Tissue Engineering Group, Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Technical University of Catalonia (UPC), Barcelona East School of Engineering (EEBE), 08019, Barcelona, Spain.
Laura Catalina CórdobaBiomaterials, Biomechanics and Tissue Engineering Group, Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Technical University of Catalonia (UPC), Barcelona East School of Engineering (EEBE), 08019, Barcelona, Spain.
Judit Buxadera-PalomeroBiomaterials, Biomechanics and Tissue Engineering Group, Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Technical University of Catalonia (UPC), Barcelona East School of Engineering (EEBE), 08019, Barcelona, Spain.
Andrea MarquinaBiomaterials, Biomechanics and Tissue Engineering Group, Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Technical University of Catalonia (UPC), Barcelona East School of Engineering (EEBE), 08019, Barcelona, Spain.
Emilio Jiménez-PiquéBarcelona Research Center in Multiscale Science and Engineering, UPC, EEBE, 08019, Barcelona, Spain.
Maria-Pau GinebraBiomaterials, Biomechanics and Tissue Engineering Group, Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Technical University of Catalonia (UPC), Barcelona East School of Engineering (EEBE), 08019, Barcelona, Spain.
José Luis CortinaResource Recovery and Environmental Management Group, UPC, EEBE, 08019, Barcelona, Spain.
Marta PeguerolesBiomaterials, Biomechanics and Tissue Engineering Group, Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Technical University of Catalonia (UPC), Barcelona East School of Engineering (EEBE), 08019, Barcelona, Spain.
Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya · ESInstitute for Bioengineering of Catalonia · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the recent decades, zinc (Zn) and its alloys have been drawing attention as promising candidates for bioresorbable cardiovascular stents due to its degradation rate more suitable than magnesium (Mg) and iron (Fe) alloys. However, its mechanical properties need to be improved in order to meet the criteria for vascular stents. This work investigates the mechanical properties, biodegradability and biocompatibility of Zn-Mg and Zn-Cu alloys in order to determine a proper alloy composition for optimal stent performance. Nanoindentation measurements are performed to characterize the mechanical properties at the nanoscale as a function of the Zn microstructure variations induced by alloying. The biodegradation mechanisms are discussed and correlated to microstructure, mechanical performance and bacterial/cell response. Addition of Mg or Cu alloying elements refined the microstructure of Zn and enhanced yield strength (YS) and ultimate tensile strength (UTS) proportional to the volume fraction of secondary phases. Zn-1Mg showed the higher YS and UTS and better performance in terms of degradation stability in Hanks' solution. Zn-Cu alloys presented an antibacterial effect for

Indexed as

BiocompatibilityBioresorbable metalsGalvanic corrosionNanoindentationZinc alloys

Identifiers

PMID34027233
PMCPMC8121665
OpenAlexW3165580671

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.