ArticleGels (Basel, Switzerland)2022
Evaluating the Biocompatibility of an Injectable Wound Matrix in a Murine Model.
Article in Gels (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Collagen-Based Medical Devices for Regenerative Medicine and Tissue Engineering.Applied biochemistry and biotechnology · 2024Review
- An Update on the Clinical Efficacy and Safety of Collagen Injectables for Aesthetic and Regenerative Medicine Applications.Polymers · 2023Review
- Article
- Biocompatibility Assessment of Polylactic Acid (PLA) and Nanobioglass (n-BG) Nanocomposites for Biomedical Applications.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
(1) Background: Developing a high-quality, injectable biomaterial that is labor-saving, cost-efficient, and patient-ready is highly desirable. Our research group has previously developed a collagen-based injectable scaffold for the treatment of a variety of wounds including wounds with deep and irregular beds. Here, we investigated the biocompatibility of our liquid scaffold in mice and compared the results to a commercially available injectable granular collagen-based product. (2) Methods: Scaffolds were applied in sub-dermal pockets on the dorsum of mice. To examine the interaction between the scaffolds and the host tissue, samples were harvested after 1 and 2 weeks and stained for collagen content using Masson's Trichrome staining. Immunofluorescence staining and quantification were performed to assess the type and number of cells infiltrating each scaffold. (3) Results: Histological evaluation after 1 and 2 weeks demonstrated early and efficient integration of our liquid scaffold with no evident adverse foreign body reaction. This rapid incorporation was accompanied by significant cellular infiltration of stromal and immune cells into the scaffold when compared to the commercial product (
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.