Suppr超能文献

生物材料对感染的增强作用:三种材料的比较

Potentiation of infections by biomaterials: a comparison of three materials.

作者信息

Karlan M S, Mufson R A, Grizzard M B, Buscemi P A, Hench L, Goldberg E P

出版信息

Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1981 Jul-Aug;89(4):528-34. doi: 10.1177/019459988108900404.

Abstract

Biomaterial implants frequently potentiate infections in patients, yet rarely have we considered the interactions between bacteria and biomaterials responsible for this. There is extensive literature concerning suture materials of various types and a few studies comparing porous and solid implants. We have developed a simple, relatively atraumatic model for comparing rates of infection surrounding a biomaterial implant in paired single animal observations. Statistically significant differences between silicone and fluorocarbon implants and between silicone and bioglass implants are demonstrated. The relatively greater rate of infection with silicones is consistent with a previous clinical study. The further use of this model for evaluation of material-surface interfacial effects is proposed.

摘要

生物材料植入物常常会使患者更容易感染,然而我们很少考虑导致这种情况的细菌与生物材料之间的相互作用。有大量关于各种类型缝合材料的文献,也有一些比较多孔植入物和实心植入物的研究。我们已经开发出一种简单、相对无创的模型,用于在成对的单只动物观察中比较生物材料植入物周围的感染率。结果表明,硅胶植入物和氟碳化合物植入物之间以及硅胶植入物和生物玻璃植入物之间存在统计学上的显著差异。硅胶感染率相对较高与之前的一项临床研究结果一致。建议进一步使用该模型来评估材料 - 表面界面效应。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验