ReviewBioengineering (Basel, Switzerland)2023
Implant Imaging: Perspectives of Nuclear Imaging in Implant, Biomaterial, and Stem Cell Research.
Review in Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. 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.
- Innovative animal models for surgical interventions and implant biocompatibility: a translational perspective.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2025Review
- Personalized and genetically engineered animal models for next-generation surgical implant validation.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2025Review
- Diagnostic and therapeutic strategies in combating implanted medical device-associated bacterial biofilm infections.Folia microbiologica · 2025Review
- Preparation and PET/CT imaging of implant directedJournal of nanobiotechnology · 2023Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Until now, very few efforts have been made to specifically trace, monitor, and visualize implantations, artificial organs, and bioengineered scaffolds for tissue engineering in vivo. While mainly X-Ray, CT, and MRI methods have been used for this purpose, the applications of more sensitive, quantitative, specific, radiotracer-based nuclear imaging techniques remain a challenge. As the need for biomaterials increases, so does the need for research tools to evaluate host responses. PET (positron emission tomography) and SPECT (single photon emission computer tomography) techniques are promising tools for the clinical translation of such regenerative medicine and tissue engineering efforts. These tracer-based methods offer unique and inevitable support, providing specific, quantitative, visual, non-invasive feedback on implanted biomaterials, devices, or transplanted cells. PET and SPECT can improve and accelerate these studies through biocompatibility, inertivity, and immune-response evaluations over long investigational periods at high sensitivities with low limits of detection. The wide range of radiopharmaceuticals, the newly developed specific bacteria, and the inflammation of specific or fibrosis-specific tracers as well as labeled individual nanomaterials can represent new, valuable tools for implant research. This review aims to summarize the opportunities of nuclear-imaging-supported implant research, including bone, fibrosis, bacteria, nanoparticle, and cell imaging, as well as the latest cutting-edge pretargeting methods.
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.