ArticleScientific reports2024
Modified polymeric biomaterials with antimicrobial and immunomodulating properties.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Histomorphometric Evaluation of the Tissue Response to Xenogeneic Extracellular Peritoneal Matrix and Synthetic UltraPro Mesh under Conditions of Pseudomonas aeruginosa Infection.Bulletin of experimental biology and medicine · 2026Article
- Research progress on composite nerve guidance conduits with immune-regulatory functions.Frontiers in immunology · 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
14 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The modification of the surgical polypropylene mesh and the polytetrafluoroethylene vascular prosthesis with cecropin A (small peptide) and puromycin (aminonucleoside) yielded very stable preparations of modified biomaterials. The main emphasis was placed on analyses of their antimicrobial activity and potential immunomodulatory and non-cytotoxic properties towards the CCD841 CoTr model cell line. Cecropin A did not significantly affect the viability or proliferation of the CCD 841 CoTr cells, regardless of its soluble or immobilized form. In contrast, puromycin did not induce a significant decrease in the cell viability or proliferation in the immobilized form but significantly decreased cell viability and proliferation when administered in the soluble form. The covalent immobilization of these two molecules on the surface of biomaterials resulted in stable preparations that were able to inhibit the multiplication of Staphylococcus aureus and S. epidermidis strains. It was also found that the preparations induced the production of cytokines involved in antibacterial protection mechanisms and stimulated the immune response. The key regulator of this activity may be related to TLR4, a receptor recognizing bacterial LPS. In the present study, these factors were produced not only in the conditions of LPS stimulation but also in the absence of LPS, which indicates that cecropin A- and puromycin-modified biomaterials may upregulate pathways leading to humoral antibacterial immune response.
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.