ArticleBiomedical microdevices2022
Silicon membranes for extracorporeal life support: a comparison of design and fabrication methodologies.
Article in Biomedical microdevices, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- A silicon membrane microfluidic oxygenator for use as an artificial placenta with minimal anticoagulation.Bioengineering & translational medicine · 2025Article
- Oxygen transport in nanoporous SiN membrane compared to PDMS and polypropylene for microfluidic ECMO.Biomedical microdevices · 2025Article
- Oxygen Transport in Nanoporous SiN Membrane Compared to PDMS and Polypropylene for Microfluidic ECMO.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Extracorporeal life support is an advanced therapy that circulates blood through an extracorporeal oxygenator, performing gas exchange outside the body. However, its use is limited by severe complications, including bleeding, clotting, and hemolysis. Semiconductor silicon-based membranes have emerged as an alternative to traditional hollow-fiber semipermeable membranes. These membranes offer excellent gas exchange efficiency and the potential to increase hemocompatibility by improving flow dynamics. In this work, we evaluate two next-generation silicon membrane designs, which are intended to be mechanically robust and efficient in gas exchange, while simultaneously reducing fabrication complexity. The "window" design features 10 µm pores on one side and large windows on the back side. The "cavern" design also uses 10 µm pores but contains a network of interconnected buried caverns to distribute the sweep gas from smaller inlet holes. Both designs were shown to be technically viable and able to be reproducibly fabricated. In addition, they both were mechanically robust and withstood 30 psi of transmembrane pressure without breakage or bubbling. At low sweep gas pressures, gas transfer efficiency was similar, with the partial pressure of oxygen in water increasing by 10.7 ± 2.3 mmHg (mean ± standard deviation) and 13.6 ± 1.9 mmHg for the window and cavern membranes, respectively. Gas transfer efficiency was also similar at higher pressures. At 10 psi, oxygen tension increased by 16.8 ± 5.7 mmHg (window) and 18.9 ± 1.3 mmHg (cavern). We conclude that silicon membranes featuring a 10 µm pore size can simplify the fabrication process and improve mechanical robustness while maintaining excellent efficiency.
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.