Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37849668›Full record

ReviewBME frontiers2023

Vascular Grafts: Technology Success/Technology Failure.

Buddy Ratner

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BME frontiers, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing 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

30 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Angiogenesis: Biological Mechanisms and In Vitro Models.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2025
    Review
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

1 author.

Buddy RatnerCenter for Dialysis Innovation (CDI), Departments of Bioengineering and Chemical Engineering, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Vascular prostheses (grafts) are widely used for hemodialysis blood access, trauma repair, aneurism repair, and cardiovascular reconstruction. However, smaller-diameter (≤4 mm) grafts that would be valuable for many reconstructions have not been achieved to date, although hundreds of papers on small-diameter vascular grafts have been published. This perspective article presents a hypothesis that may open new research avenues for the development of small-diameter vascular grafts. A historical review of the vascular graft literature and specific types of vascular grafts is presented focusing on observations important to the hypothesis to be presented. Considerations in critically reviewing the vascular graft literature are discussed. The hypothesis that perhaps the "biocompatible biomaterials" comprising our vascular grafts-biomaterials that generate dense, nonvascularized collagenous capsules upon implantation-may not be all that biocompatible is presented. Examples of materials that heal with tissue reconstruction and vascularity, in contrast to the fibrotic encapsulation, are offered. Such prohealing materials may lead the way to a new generation of vascular grafts suitable for small-diameter reconstructions.

Identifiers

PMID37849668
PMCPMC10521696

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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 Socratic graph.