Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42732234›Full record

ArticleDiscover polymers2026

Fabrication techniques for thin-walled silicone ocular implants using parylene-C coated 3D-printed molds.

Hyeonji Kim, Wen Hong, Sajjad Abdollahramezani, Daanyal Raja, Roger Wise, Ian Coates, Joseph M DeSimone, Charles DeBoer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Discover polymers, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Hyeonji KimDepartment of Ophthalmology, School of Medicine, Byers Eye Institute at Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA 94304 USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0009-6918-6564
Wen HongDepartment of Ophthalmology, School of Medicine, Byers Eye Institute at Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA 94304 USA.
Sajjad AbdollahramezaniDepartment of Ophthalmology, School of Medicine, Byers Eye Institute at Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA 94304 USA.
Daanyal RajaDepartment of Ophthalmology, School of Medicine, Byers Eye Institute at Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA 94304 USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1419-5297
Roger WiseDepartment of Radiology, School of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305 USA.
Ian CoatesDepartment of Chemical Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305 USA.
Joseph M DeSimoneDepartment of Radiology, School of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305 USA.
Charles DeBoerDepartment of Ophthalmology, School of Medicine, Byers Eye Institute at Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA 94304 USA.

Funding

Stanford Vision Research CoreP30EY026877 · NEI · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI TIRIN MOORE · 2017 to 2026
$8.0M
Lens Capsule Based Extended Drug Delivery DeviceK08EY036955 · NEI · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI Charles Meno Theodore DeBoer · 2025 to 2026
$516k
NEI NIH HHS K08 EY036955NEI NIH HHS P30 EY026877
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Silicone drug delivery implants are widely used, but their fabrication often relies on non‑standardized, empirically tuned protocols that limit reproducibility and transfer across labs. Here, we present a reproducible and generalizable fabrication workflow that brings together design rules, process settings, and validation for rapid fabrication of complex thin-walled biocompatible silicone implants. We outline mold design choices, including vents and micro refill-valve/filter placement, and post‑processing to make smooth inner surfaces, and we compare molds using an applied release agent (mold‑release chemical) versus molds coated with a parylene‑C barrier. Contact angle, Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FT-IR), and residue analyses show that parylene‑C prevents cure inhibition and enables clean demolding. We then link spin‑coating variables to membrane thickness and use rheology to guide material selection for pattern fidelity. We also correlate the curing time with network formation and extractable content. Device-level cross-sectional analyses and cytocompatibility assays are also conducted, with the assays indicating excellent compatibility with cells. Taken together, this work provides practical, transferable practice guidance and a reference workflow that other laboratories can adopt to make consistent silicone drug delivery implants and move the field toward standardization. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at https://doi.org/10.1007/s44347-026-00063-7.

Indexed as

3D printingDevice fabricationDrug deliveryMicromoldingOphthalmic device

Identifiers

PMID42732234
PMCPMC13569541

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.