ArticlePolymers2023
Amniotic Membrane Biopolymer for Regenerative Medicine.
Article in Polymers, 2023. 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.
- Cell-Laden Gel Biomimetic Skin Promotes Full-Thickness Skin Wound Regeneration.Gels (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- A novel decellularized conjunctival stroma biomaterial for conjunctival reconstruction following pterygium surgery.International journal of ophthalmology · 2026Article
- De-Epithelization of the Human Amniotic Membrane Using a System Involving Ozonated Water and Ultrasound.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Biopolymers based on the amniotic membrane compare favorably with synthetic materials in that, along with a specific 2D structure, they have biologically active properties. However, in recent years, there has been a tendency to perform decellularization of the biomaterial during the preparation of the scaffold. In this study, we studied the microstructure of 157 samples and identified individual biological components in the manufacture of a medical biopolymer from an amniotic membrane using various methods. Group 1 had 55 samples, and the amniotic membrane was impregnated with glycerol and dried over silica gel. Group 2 had 48 samples, and the decellularized amniotic membrane was impregnated with glycerol followed by lyophilization, Group 3 had 44 samples, and the decellularized amniotic membrane without pre-impregnation with glycerol was subjected to lyophilization. Decellularization was performed by treatment with a low-frequency ultrasound at a frequency of 24-40 kHz in an ultrasonic bath. A morphological study using a light microscope and a scanning electron microscope showed the preservation of the structure of the biomaterial and more complete decellularization in samples subjected to lyophilization without prior impregnation with glycerol. The study of the Raman spectroscopy lines of a biopolymer made from a lyophilized amniotic membrane without preliminary impregnation with glycerin showed significant differences in the intensity of the spectral lines of amides, glycogen, and proline. Additionally, in these samples, the spectral lines of Raman scattering the characteristic of glycerol were not visualized; therefore, only biological substances characteristic of the native amniotic membrane have been preserved.
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.