Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 227

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Microneedle Arrays Allow Lower Microbial Penetration Than Hypodermic Needles In Vitro

Open access
Donnelly, Ryan F., Singh, Thakur Raghu Raj, Tunney, Michael M., Morrow, Desmond I. J., McCarron, Paul A., O’Mahony, Conor, Woolfson, A. David·2009·Pharmaceutical Research

Abstract

MethodsIn this study we determined, for the first time, the ability of microorganisms to traverse microneedle-induced holes using two different in vitro models.ResultsWhen employing Silescol® membranes, the numbers of Candida albicans, Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Staphylococcus epidermidis crossing the membranes were an order of magnitude lower when the membranes were punctured by microneedles rather than a 21G hypodermic needle. Apart from the movement of C. albicans across hypodermic needle-punctured membranes, where 40.2% of the microbial load on control membranes permeated the barrier over 24 h, the numbers of permeating microorganisms was less than 5% of the original microbial load on control membranes. Experiments employing excised porcine skin and radiolabelled microorganisms showed that the numbers of microorganisms penetrating skin beyond the stratum corneum were approximately an order of magnitude greater than the numbers crossing Silescol® membranes in the corresponding experiments. Approximately 103 cfu of each microorganism adhered to hypodermic needles during insertion. The numbers of microorganisms adhering to MN arrays were an order of magnitude higher in each case.ConclusionWe have shown here that microneedle puncture resulted in significantly less microbial penetration than did hypodermic needle puncture and that no microorganisms crossed the viable epidermis in microneedle—punctured skin, in contrast to needle-punctured skin. Given the antimicrobial properties of skin, it is, therefore, likely that application of microneedle arrays to skin in an appropriate manner would not cause either local or systemic infection in normal circumstances in immune-competent patients. In supporting widespread clinical use of microneedle-based delivery systems, appropriate animal studies are now needed to conclusively demonstrate this in vivo. Safety in patients will be enhanced by aseptic or sterile manufacture and by fabricating microneedles from self-disabling materials (e.g. dissolving or biodegradable polymers) to prevent inappropriate or accidental reuse.

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 · 10.1007/s11095-009-9967-2

Cites

1 of 1 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 1 references

Cited by

See all 227

Metadata

Authors
Donnelly, R. F., Singh, T. R. R., Tunney, M. M., Morrow, D. I. J., McCarron, P. A., O’Mahony, C., & Woolfson, A. D.
Venue
Pharmaceutical Research
Published
2009-09-11
Volume
26
Issue
11
Pages
2513-2522
ISSN
  • 0724-8741 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-904X
OpenAlex
W2086014349
Cited by
227
References
1
FWCI
8.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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: Microneedle Arrays Allow Lower Microbial Penetration Than Hypodermic Needles In Vitro. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/s11095-009-9967-2
The paper
Donnelly, R. F., Singh, T. R. R., Tunney, M. M., Morrow, D. I. J., McCarron, P. A., O’Mahony, C., & Woolfson, A. D. (2009). Microneedle Arrays Allow Lower Microbial Penetration Than Hypodermic Needles In Vitro. Pharmaceutical Research. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11095-009-9967-2

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.