| Title |
In vivo evaluation of bacterial cellulose/acrylic acid wound dressing hydrogel containing keratinocytes and fibroblasts for burn wounds
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Drug Delivery and Translational Research, January 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s13346-017-0475-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Najwa Mohamad, Evelyn Yun Xi Loh, Mh Busra Fauzi, Min Hwei Ng, Mohd Cairul Iqbal Mohd Amin |
| Abstract |
The healing of wounds, including those from burns, currently exerts a burden on healthcare systems worldwide. Hydrogels are widely used as wound dressings and in the field of tissue engineering. The popularity of bacterial cellulose-based hydrogels has increased owing to their biocompatibility. Previous study demonstrated that bacterial cellulose/acrylic acid (BC/AA) hydrogel increased the healing rate of burn wound. This in vivo study using athymic mice has extended the use of BC/AA hydrogel by the addition of human epidermal keratinocytes and human dermal fibroblasts. The results showed that hydrogel loaded with cells produces the greatest acceleration on burn wound healing, followed by treatment with hydrogel alone, compared with the untreated group. The percentage wound reduction on day 13 in the mice treated with hydrogel loaded with cells (77.34 ± 6.21%) was significantly higher than that in the control-treated mice (64.79 ± 6.84%). Histological analysis, the expression of collagen type I via immunohistochemistry, and transmission electron microscopy indicated a greater deposition of collagen in the mice treated with hydrogel loaded with cells than in the mice administered other treatments. Therefore, the BC/AA hydrogel has promising application as a wound dressing and a cell carrier. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Malaysia | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 150 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 150 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 31 | 21% |
| Student > Bachelor | 19 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 18 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 10 | 7% |
| Researcher | 9 | 6% |
| Other | 16 | 11% |
| Unknown | 47 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Engineering | 16 | 11% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 15 | 10% |
| Chemistry | 15 | 10% |
| Materials Science | 11 | 7% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 7% |
| Other | 26 | 17% |
| Unknown | 56 | 37% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 June 2018.
All research outputs
#14,373,275
of 23,016,919 outputs
Outputs from Drug Delivery and Translational Research
#303
of 516 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#240,797
of 442,576 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Drug Delivery and Translational Research
#16
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,016,919 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 516 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 442,576 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.