ReviewMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2023
Biocompatibility Testing for Implants: A Novel Tool for Selection and Characterization.
Review in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 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
35 citing papers in PubMed.
- Continuous local minocycline delivery from PLA nanosphere-coated dental implants with long-term antibacterial activity and biocompatibility.RSC advances · 2026Article
- Collaborative Decision-Making in Implant Abutment Selection: Perspectives of Dentists and Dental Technicians in a Cross-Sectional Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- A Methodological Approach to Assessing Biocompatibility: 3D Printing and Subcutaneous Implantation in Rats.ACS omega · 2026Article
- Nanoparticle-Enabled Biomaterials for Controlled Drug Delivery in Implantable and Wearable Devices.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Highly Controlled Parylene C Coating on Titanium for Invasive Biomedical Applications.Micromachines · 2026Article
- HME-FDM 3D-Printed Implantable Drug Delivery Systems-From Design to Characterization.Pharmaceutics · 2026Review
- Cytotoxicity Assessment and Indentation Size Effect of Low-Cost Experimental Implant Alloys.ACS materials Au · 2026Article
- Synchronizing degradation with regeneration: a model-driven framework for designing biodegradable biomaterials in bone tissue engineering.Journal of materials science. Materials in medicine · 2026Review
- Cellulose-based nanomaterials: innovations in wound healing and regenerative medicine.Protoplasma · 2026Review
- Green and Scalable Manufacturing of Biodegradable Polymer Scaffolds: Solvent-Free Processing, Supercritical COPolymers · 2026Review
- Physicochemical Characterization and In Vitro Biocompatibility of Epoxy- and Silicone-Based Endodontic Materials.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Chitosan-based hydrogels for nitric oxide-mediated myocardial repair: advances and prospects.Journal of biological engineering · 2026Review
- Is orthopaedics entering the age of generative AI?-A narrative review of current applications challenges and future directions.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2026Review
- Integration of finite element method and artificial intelligence for evaluating PEEK composites in rib cage reconstruction process under impact conditions.Journal of materials science. Materials in medicine · 2025Article
- Preclinical research models for evaluating the biocompatibility of bioresorbable metallic cardiovascular stents: A comparative review.Bioactive materials · 2025Review
- Programmable Hydrogels: Frontiers in Dynamic Closed-Loop Systems, Biomimetic Synergy, and Clinical Translation.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025Review
- Bioprinting for craniofacial reconstruction: A review of advancements, clinical use, and challenges.Journal of cranio-maxillo-facial surgery : official publication of the European Association for Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery · 2025Review
- Advances in Silicone Implants Characterization: A Comprehensive Overview of Chemical, Physical and Biological Methods for Biocompatibility Assessment.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Development, characterization and biological studies of Mn-doped ZnO/Ti biomaterials for regenerative medicine.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Review
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
This review article dives into the complex world of biocompatibility testing: chemical, mechanical, and biological characterization, including many elements of biocompatibility, such as definitions, descriptive examples, and the practical settings. The focus extends to evaluating standard documents obtained from reliable organizations; with a particular focus on open-source information, including FDA-USA, ISO 10933 series, and TÜV SÜD. We found a significant gap in this field: biomaterial scientists and those involved in the realm of medical device development in general, and implants in particular, lack access to a tool that reorganizes the process of selecting the appropriate biocompatibility test for the implant being examined. This work progressed through two key phases that aimed to provide a solution to this gap. A straightforward "yes or no" flowchart was initially developed to guide biocompatibility testing decisions based on the previously accumulated information. Subsequently, the Python code was employed, generating a framework through targeted questions. This work reshapes biocompatibility evaluation, bridging theory and practical implementation. An integrated approach via a flowchart and the Python code empowers stakeholders to navigate biocompatibility testing effortlessly. To conclude, researchers are now better equipped for a safer, more effective implant development, propelling the field towards improved patient care and innovative progress.
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.