Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 257

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 19 of the 19 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

In vivo behavior of poly(1,3‐trimethylene carbonate) and copolymers of 1,3‐trimethylene carbonate with D,L‐lactide or ϵ‐caprolactone: Degradation and tissue response

Pêgo, A. P., Van Luyn, M. J. A., Brouwer, L. A., van Wachem, P. B., Poot, A. A., Grijpma, D. W., Feijen, J.·2003·Journal of Biomedical Materials Research Part A

Abstract

The degradation and the tissue response evoked by poly(1,3‐trimethylene carbonate) [poly(TMC)] and copolymers of TMC with either 52 mol % D,L‐lactide (DLLA) or 89 mol % ϵ‐caprolactone (CL) were evaluated in vivo by subcutaneous implantation of polymer films in rats for periods up to one year. Poly(TMC) specimens were extensively degraded after 3 weeks and, as confirmed by histology, totally resorbed in less than a year. A fast linear decrease in thickness and mass without a change in molecular weight was observed. Initially an acute sterile inflammatory tissue reaction, caused by the implantation procedure, was observed, followed by a mild macrophage‐mediated foreign body reaction that lasted during the resorption period of the polymer. It is concluded that in vivo, poly(TMC) is degraded via surface erosion involving cellular‐mediated processes. The degradation of the copolymers was slower than that of poly(TMC), taking place via autocatalyzed bulk hydrolysis, preferentially of ester bonds. The TMC‐DLLA copolymer degraded 20 times faster than the TMC‐CL one. In both cases, the tissue reaction upon implantation resembled a sterile inflammatory reaction followed by a foreign body reaction that led to the polymer encapsulation. Significant mass loss was only observed for the TMC‐DLLA copolymer, which underwent 96% mass loss in 1 year. When extensive mass loss started, a mild‐to‐moderate secondary foreign body reaction, related to clearance of the polymer fragments, was triggered. The results presented in this study demonstrate that poly(TMC) and both TMC copolymers are biodegradable and biocompatible materials, making these polymers attractive for the preparation of short‐ and long‐term degradable devices for soft tissue engineering. © 2003 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Biomed Mater Res 67A: 1044–1054, 2003

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/jbm.a.10121

Cites

19 of 19 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 19 references

Cited by

See all 257

Metadata

Authors
Pêgo, A. P., Van Luyn, M. J. A., Brouwer, L. A., van Wachem, P. B., Poot, A. A., Grijpma, D. W., & Feijen, J.
Venue
Journal of Biomedical Materials Research Part A
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2003-10-29
Volume
67A
Issue
3
Pages
1044-1054
ISSN
  • 1549-3296 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-4965
OpenAlex
W2160277604
Cited by
257
References
19
FWCI
4.24
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: In vivo behavior of poly(1,3‐trimethylene carbonate) and copolymers of 1,3‐trimethylene carbonate with D,L‐lactide or ϵ‐caprolactone: Degradation and tissue response. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/jbm.a.10121
The paper
Pêgo, A. P., Van Luyn, M. J. A., Brouwer, L. A., van Wachem, P. B., Poot, A. A., Grijpma, D. W., & Feijen, J. (2003). In vivo behavior of poly(1,3‐trimethylene carbonate) and copolymers of 1,3‐trimethylene carbonate with D,L‐lactide or ϵ‐caprolactone: Degradation and tissue response. Journal of Biomedical Materials Research Part A. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.a.10121

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.