ArticleResearch square2026
Material Composition and Implantation Site Affect in vivo Device Degradation Rate.
Article in Research square, 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Tissue engineering requires biomedical devices that stabilize wounds, then degrade as tissue regenerates. However, published material degradation rates are often conflicting. Incorporating monitoring functionality into implanted devices allows real-time assessment of degradation and failure, but requires contrast agents, as most biomedical devices are composed of polymeric materials invisible to medical imaging modalities. Computed tomography (CT)-visible radiopaque composites were created from 5-20wt% tantalum oxide (TaOx) nanoparticles in polymers with distinct degradation profiles: polycaprolactone (PCL), poly(lactide-co-glycolide) (PLGA) 85:15 and PLGA 50:50, representing slow, medium and fast degrading materials respectively. Radiopaque phantoms, mimicking biomedical devices, were implanted into mice intramuscularly or intraperitoneally, and monitored via CT over 20 weeks. Changes in phantom volume, including collapse and swelling, were visualized. Phantom degradation profile was dictated by polymer matrix, regardless of nanoparticle addition. Foreign body response was dependent on implant site and degradation kinetics were significantly affected in middegrading materials, transitioning from linear degradation intramuscularly to exponential degradation intraperitoneally, due to differences in inflammatory responses and fluid flow. Nanoparticle excretion via liver and spleen lagged polymer degradation, requiring modulation of nanoparticle clearance. Tracking real time device behavior advances the new era of personalized medicine, allowing individualized treatment plans to biomedical devices.
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.