ArticleTranslational vision science & technology2025
Polydioxanone Membrane for Guided Conjunctival Tissue Reconstruction: An Experimental Model in Rabbits.
Article in Translational vision science & technology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Human Macrophage Polarization Dynamics on a 3D Fibrous Polydioxanone Mesh In Vitro.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2026Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate the clinical and histopathological performance of polydioxanone (PDO) membranes in conjunctival reconstruction compared with amniotic membrane (AM), assessing epithelialization, inflammation, and tissue integration in a rabbit model. Methods: Fifteen New Zealand white rabbits underwent conjunctival resection, with each eye receiving either a PDO or AM graft. Animals were euthanized at 7, 14, 21, and 28 days. Clinical and histopathological evaluation included epithelialization, inflammation, fibrosis, granulation tissue, and graft retention. Results: Both membranes supported conjunctival healing, with no statistically significant differences in epithelialization, inflammation, fibrosis, presence of granulation tissue, or graft remnants. PDO provided structured handling, whereas AM was more delicate but surgically challenging. Histopathology revealed similar inflammatory and regenerative responses, confirming PDO biocompatibility. Conclusions: The PDO membrane is a viable synthetic alternative to AM for conjunctival reconstruction. Despite minor differences in handling and degradation, PDO exhibited comparable efficacy. Further human studies are needed to validate its application. Translational Relevance: These findings support the potential use of PDO membranes in ocular surface reconstruction, particularly in settings where AM availability is limited. The use of PDO could expand treatment options for conjunctival defects and enhance surgical outcomes in ophthalmology.
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.