ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2021
Assessing Biocompatibility of Face Mask Materials during COVID-19 Pandemic by a Rapid Multi-Assays Strategy.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Staphylococcus epidermidis is a safer surrogate of Staphylococcus aureus in testing bacterial filtration efficiency of face masks.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Co-Delivery of Dexamethasone and Captopril by α8 Integrin Antibodies Modified Liposome-PLGA Nanoparticle Hybrids for Targeted Anti-Inflammatory/Anti-Fibrosis Therapy of Glomerulonephritis.International journal of nanomedicine · 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
17 authors.
Funding
Abstract
During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, scientific authorities strongly suggested the use of face masks (FMs). FM materials (FMMs) have to satisfy the medical device biocompatibility requirements as indicated in the technical standard EN ISO 10993-1:2018. The biologic evaluation must be confirmed by in vivo tests to verify cytotoxicity, sensitisation, and skin irritation. Some of these tests require an extensive period of time for their execution, which is incompatible with an emergency situation. In this study, we propose to verify the safety of FMMs combining the assessment of 3-[4,5-dimethylthiazolyl-2]-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide (MTT) with quantification of nitric oxide (NO) and interleukin-6 (IL-6), as predictive markers of skin sensitisation or irritation based on human primary fibroblasts. Two hundred and forty-two FMMs were collected and classified according to spectrometer IR in polypropylene, paper, cotton, polyester, polyethylene terephthalate, 3-dimensional printing, and viscose. Of all FMMs tested, 50.8% passed all the assays, 48% failed at least one, and only 1.2% failed all. By a low cost, rapid and highly sensitive multi assays strategy tested on human skin fibroblasts against a large variety of FMMs, we propose a strategy to promptly evaluate biocompatibility in wearable materials.
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.