ArticleJournal of veterinary research2026
Development and physicochemical evaluation of a gelatine-based hydrogel tube for potential use in veterinary glaucoma implants.
Article in Journal of veterinary research, 2026. 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
Introduction: Glaucoma is an eye disease in dogs and cats that increases intraocular pressure. There is no treatment method that is effective, safe and economical; however, scaffold drainage systems and hydrogels offer new therapeutic possibilities. The aim of this research was to develop a hydrogel implant for ophthalmic applications. Material and Methods: Solutions at 5%, 10% and 15% concentrations of food-grade porcine gelatine and 15% and 16% concentrations of chemically purified gelatine with 19, 20, 21 mL or 25 mL of 2.5% glutaraldehyde as a crosslinking agent per 10 mL of distilled water were candidate formulations for the hydrogel. Visual and tactile assessments were made to choose the best candidate. The implant was a thin tube with an aluminium core and a Teflon foil mould. Curing was by immersion in ethanol. Ionic conductivity and compressive strength tests were performed on cylinder-shaped samples of the hydrogel. The best candidate hydrogel was tested calorimetrically for water content and its microstructure was examined for fluid transport capacity. Results: The analyses confirmed the beneficial effect of alcohol on the structure. Hydrogels cured in ethanol were stiffer and more homogeneous and stable than those which were not, and the latter were eliminated. A hydrogel made with 1.8 g of 15% gelatine concentration, 19 mL of glutaraldehyde and 10 mL of distilled water was characterised by the highest resistance to standard compressive force. The highest ionic conductivity was obtained for the same sample. Thermal analysis showed that hydrogels stored in water contained significantly more weakly bound water (~0.53 g), whereas ethanol-conditioned hydrogels contained substantially less (~0.14 g), indicating a reduced water uptake and altered hydration profile due to alcohol conditioning. A hydrogel material based on gelatine crosslinked with glutaraldehyde was developed, from which a thin, small-diameter tube implant was made. Conclusion: These studies have shown that the implant could potentially provide a solution for minimally invasive glaucoma treatment in small animals, but the testing phase must be continued.
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.