ArticleIn vivo (Athens, Greece)
Evaluation of Biocompatibility and Healing Properties of Dural Substitutes Produced by Electrospinning Technology.
Article in In vivo (Athens, Greece). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
aimDural reconstruction is a critical process after neurosurgical procedures. Improper dural repair leads to serious side-effects, such as cerebrospinal fluid leakage or infection. This is why it is important to properly repair the dura using a dural substitute, and research into dural substitutes is ongoing. The ideal dural substitute should be non-toxic, biocompatible, and capable of maintaining adequate tension and preventing cerebrospinal fluid leakage for extended periods in vivo. This study evaluated the biocompatibility and healing properties of Safe-Seal, poly-L-lactic acid synthetic bioabsorbable dural substitute produced by electrospinning technology. MATERIALS AND
methodsSafe-Seal, was created by electrospinning, which is a technique for nanofiberizing polymers into three-dimensional structures, and its cytotoxicity was evaluated. The animal study used 30 rats, divided into three groups assessed at two time points (4 and 12 weeks). The study groups were a negative control group with no treatment, an experimental group with Safe-Seal (TDM Co. Ltd., Gwangju, Republic of Korea) implantation, and a positive control group with a commercial product, Redura
resultsSafe-Seal exhibited no cytotoxic or adverse effects in the in vivo animal study. Histologically, Safe-Seal displayed less inflammatory cell infiltration, less adhesion to brain tissue, and connectivity with the surrounding dura mater as compared to the negative control group and without any significant differences from Redura
conclusionSafe-Seal presented adequate biocompatibility in vivo and contributed to the healing of the dura mater at a similar level to that of Redura
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.