Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesLaboratory StudyPubMedOpen access

Biocompatible bacterial cellulose-poly(2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate) nanocomposite films.

Figueiredo AG., Figueiredo AR., Alonso-Varona A., Fernandes SC., Palomares T., Rubio-Azpeitia E.

Laboratory Study on Face & Skin, published in Biomed Res Int (2013) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesEvidence level of this study

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

  • Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
  • Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
  • Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
  • Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
  • Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
Read the A–D evidence level guide

This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.

Study type
Laboratory Study
Journal
Biomed Res Int (2013)
Country
United States
Reported sample size
—
Source database
PubMed
PMID
24093101
PMCID
PMC3777182
DOI
10.1155/2013/698141
Citations
18

Abstract (original English)

A series of bacterial cellulose-poly(2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate) nanocomposite films was prepared by in situ radical polymerization of 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate (HEMA), using variable amounts of poly(ethylene glycol) diacrylate (PEGDA) as cross-linker. Thin films were obtained, and their physical, chemical, thermal, and mechanical properties were evaluated. The films showed improved translucency compared to BC and enhanced thermal stability and mechanical performance when compared to poly(2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate) (PHEMA). Finally, BC/PHEMA nanocomposites proved to be nontoxic to human adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells (ADSCs) and thus are pointed as potential dry dressings for biomedical applications.

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
  • • This is preclinical work; animal or laboratory results cannot be applied to humans.

Evidence level

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

How we grade evidence
Biocompatible MaterialsCelluloseGluconacetobacterHumansMesenchymal Stem CellsMethacrylatesNanocompositesPolyethylene GlycolsSurface Properties

Browse all related research

Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.

Related research