Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41002466›Full record

ReviewGels (Basel, Switzerland)2025

Inflammation-Responsive Hydrogels in Perioperative Pain and Wound Management: Design Strategies and Emerging Potential.

Young Eun Moon, Jin-Oh Jeong, Hoon Choi

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Gels (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing 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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Hybrid Hydrogels in Pain Management Application: A Comprehensive Review.Clinical pharmacology : advances and applications · 2026
    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

3 authors.

Young Eun MoonDepartment of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul 06591, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0001-5141-2652
Jin-Oh JeongWake Forest Institute for Regenerative Medicine (WFIRM), Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC 27157, USA.
Hoon ChoiDepartment of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul 06591, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-1806-9458

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Surgical procedures trigger dynamic inflammatory responses that influence postoperative pain, wound healing, and long-term outcomes. Conventional therapies rely on the systemic delivery of anti-inflammatory and analgesic agents, which often lack spatiotemporal precision and carry significant side effects. Inflammation-responsive hydrogels offer a promising alternative by enabling localized, stimulus-adaptive drug release aligned with the evolving biochemical milieu of surgical wounds. These smart biomaterials respond to endogenous triggers, such as reactive oxygen species, acidic pH, and proteolytic enzymes, allowing precise modulation of inflammation and tissue repair. This narrative review outlines the pathophysiological features of perioperative inflammation and the design principles of responsive hydrogel systems, including pH-, reactive oxygen species-, enzyme-sensitive, and multi-stimuli platforms. We evaluated the integration of key payloads, NSAIDs, corticosteroids, α

Indexed as

enzyme-responsive systemsinflammation-responsive hydrogelsperioperative drug deliverypH-sensitive biomaterialspostoperative painreactive oxygen speciessurgical inflammationwound healing

Identifiers

PMID41002466
PMCPMC12469436

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.