ArticleJournal of nanobiotechnology2023
Preparation and PET/CT imaging of implant directed
Article in Journal of nanobiotechnology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Unlocking the potential of mesoporous silica nanoparticles: balancing biomedical applications and safety concerns.Drug delivery · 2026Review
- Nanoreagents Against the Blood-Testis Barrier: A Strategy for Diagnosing and Treating Male Reproductive System Diseases.International journal of nanomedicine · 2026Review
- Multifunctional nanoparticles in abdominal aortic aneurysm management: from basic research to clinical transformation.Journal of nanobiotechnology · 2025Review
- Application of nanoparticles in the treatment of acute lung injury: Current situation and future directions.Materials today. Bio · 2025Review
- Nanoradiopharmaceuticals: Design Principles, Radiolabeling Strategies, and Biomedicine Applications.Pharmaceutics · 2025Review
- Article
- Nanomaterial-assisted pancreatic cancer theranostics.Regenerative biomaterials · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundImplant infections caused by biofilm forming bacteria are a major threat in orthopedic surgery. Delivering antibiotics directly to an implant affected by a bacterial biofilm via superparamagnetic nanoporous silica nanoparticles could present a promising approach. Nevertheless, short blood circulation half-life because of rapid interactions of nanoparticles with the host's immune system hinder them from being clinically used. The aim of this study was to determine the temporal in vivo resolution of magnetic nanoporous silica nanoparticle (MNPSNP) distribution and the effect of PEGylation and clodronate application using PET/CT imaging and gamma counting in an implant mouse model.
methodsPEGylated and non-PEGylated MNPSNPs were radiolabeled with gallium-68 (
resultsThe pharmacokinetics and biodistribution of all radiolabeled nanoparticles could clearly be visualized and followed by dynamic PET/CT imaging. Both variants of
conclusionTracking of
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.