ArticleActa cirurgica brasileira2020
Characterization and assessment of the genotoxicity and biocompatibility of poly (hydroxybutyrate) and norbixin membranes.
Article in Acta cirurgica brasileira, 2020. 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 7 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose To synthesize and characterize poly(hydroxybutyrate) (PHB) and norbixin membranes to evaluate them for genotoxicity in rats and wound healing in mice by histological staining. Methods For the evaluation of genotoxicity, male rats ( Rattus novegicus ) were divided into three groups (n= 5): 5% PHB/Norbixin membrane introduced into the peritoneum by laparotomy; B - negative control; C - positive control (intraperitoneal dose of cyclophosphamide 50 mg/kg). For the evaluation of biocompatibilty, a cutaneous wound was induced on the back of males mice ( Mus musculus ) divided into two experimental treatment groups: control and membrane that underwent euthanasia after 7 and 14 days treatment. Statistical analysis ware made by One Way Anova post hoc Tukey Test (p<0.05). Results Regarding the incidence of polychromatic erythrocytes, there was no difference between negative control and 5% PHB/Norbixin membrane; however, when compared to the positive control represented by cyclophosphamide, there was a significant difference (p <0.001). As for DNA damage, the changes induced in the first 4h were repaired in 24h. In addition, the membrane was effective in abbreviating the inflammatory process and served as a scaffold due to the stimulus to reepithelialization mainly on the 7 days of treatment. Conclusion The non-genotoxic PHB/Norbixin 5% membrane presented promising results that suggest its effectiveness as a guide for tissue regeneration given its biocompatibility.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.