ArticleMedical devices (Auckland, N.Z.)2022
Protective Mechanisms of Liquid Formulations for Gastro-Oesophageal Reflux Disease in a Human Reconstructed Oesophageal Epithelium Model.
Article in Medical devices (Auckland, N.Z.), 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, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effective Restoration of Gastric and Esophageal Tissues in an In Vitro Model of GERD: Mucoadhesive and Protective Properties of Xyloglucan, Pea Proteins, and Polyacrylic Acid.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Hyaluronic acid and chondroitin sulfate-based medical devices: formulations, esophageal mucosal protection, and their place in the management of GERD.Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2025Review
- Demonstrating the principal mechanism of action of medical devices intended for vaginal use on reconstructed human vaginal epithelium: the case of two hyaluronic acid-containing devices.Frontiers in drug safety and regulation · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: A novel experimental design based on a human-reconstructed oesophageal epithelium (HO2E) model has been applied to quantitively assess the properties of a set of liquid formulations, Device A (Gerdoff Methods: The formulations were applied to a prewetted HO2E model for 15 min. Then, a 0.5% caffeine solution was applied, and its penetration kinetics was assessed at 1 h and 2 h in acidic environments (pH= 3.3) to mirror exposure of the oesophageal mucosa to acidic reflux in GORD patients. Caffeine permeated into the basolateral compartment (evaluated by HPLC-UV) and Lucifer yellow (LY) permeability were quantified 15 min after application of the caffeine in acidic environments. Results: At the 15 min timepoint, Device A reduced caffeine permeation by 77.2% and LY flux by 30.4% compared to the untreated control and with a faster mode of action than that of the other liquid formulations. Transepithelial caffeine flux was reduced, albeit with different timing and efficiency, by all three compounds up to the end of the 2 hour experiment. At 1 h, Device A reduced the caffeine flux by 79.2%; Device B, by 67.2%; and Device C, by 37%. Conclusion: These results confirm the ability of the medical devices tested to interact with the oesophageal epithelium and create a temporary physical protective film for up to 2 hours after their application. The results underline differences in the mechanism of action of the three medical devices, with Device A performing faster than the other formulations. The overall results support the relevance of the reconstructed mucosal model to investigate oesophageal epithelium-product interactions and precisely differentiate liquid formulation performance.
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.