Cited by 233Medical Device Sterilization and DisinfectionAntimicrobial agents and applicationsHealthcare Regulation

Sterilization of implantable polymer-based medical devices: A review

Tipnis, Namita P., Burgess, Diane J.·2018·International Journal of Pharmaceutics

Abstract

This review article is focused on the sterilization techniques used for polymer-based implantable medical devices as well as the regulatory aspects governing sterile medical devices. Polymeric materials are increasingly used in implantable devices due to their biodegradable and biocompatible nature. Patients and medical staff often prefer long-term implantable devices and these can be achieved using high molecular weight polymers. Sterilization of polymer-based implantable devices is critical. Since all implantable devices must be sterile, the effect of the sterilization method on the different device components (such as, the polymer, the drug, the electronics, etc.) has to be considered. A comprehensive summary of the established sterilization methods is provided along with the possible effects on polymers. In addition, novel sterilization methods are also discussed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ijpharm.2017.12.003

Cites

37 of 37 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The selection of sterilization method reflects material choice of implants with polymers; gamma irradiation is fast and efficient but can degrade polymers through cross-linking, chain scission or a combination of both.

    “The selection of the sterilization method reflects material choice of the implants with polymers; e.g. gamma irradiation is fast and efficient, but can degrade polymers through 'cross-linking, chain scission or a combination of both' (Tipnis and Burgess 2018).”

    From Peripheral nerve bionic interface: a review of electrodes (2019) · cites this paper as Tipnis and Burgess 2018

  • Implantable electrodes carry the highest risk when compared with other medical technologies.

    “These implantable electrodes, carry the highest risk when compared with other medical technologies, are class III devices and therefore have stringent approval process including a premarket approval to weigh the health benefits against the risk (Tipnis and Burgess 2018).”

    From Peripheral nerve bionic interface: a review of electrodes (2019) · cites this paper as Tipnis and Burgess 2018

  • Class III devices have a stringent approval process including a premarket approval to weigh the health benefits against the risk.

    “These implantable electrodes, carry the highest risk when compared with other medical technologies, are class III devices and therefore have stringent approval process including a premarket approval to weigh the health benefits against the risk (Tipnis and Burgess 2018).”

    From Peripheral nerve bionic interface: a review of electrodes (2019) · cites this paper as Tipnis and Burgess 2018

  • Implantable electrodes are class III devices.

    “These implantable electrodes, carry the highest risk when compared with other medical technologies, are class III devices and therefore have stringent approval process including a premarket approval to weigh the health benefits against the risk (Tipnis and Burgess 2018).”

    From Peripheral nerve bionic interface: a review of electrodes (2019) · cites this paper as Tipnis and Burgess 2018

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 39 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Tipnis, N. P., & Burgess, D. J.
Affiliations
University of Connecticut (US)
Corresponding author
Burgess, Diane J.
Venue
International Journal of Pharmaceutics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-06
Volume
544
Issue
2
Pages
455-460
ISSN
0378-5173 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2780274668
Cited by
233
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 19 · 2025: 32 · 2024: 32 · 2023: 36 · 2022: 28 · 2021: 28 · 2020: 26 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 13
FWCI
12.82
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • International Journal of Pharmaceutics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Microbiology › Medical Device Sterilization and Disinfection
  • Physical Sciences › Chemistry › Organic Chemistry › Antimicrobial agents and applications
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Healthcare Regulation
Keywords
sterilization, biomedical implants, sterilization methods, biodegradable polymers, biocompatibility, drug-loaded implants
MeSH terms
Biocompatible Materials, Equipment Contamination, Polymers, Sterilization, United States, United States Food and Drug Administration, Guidelines as Topic, Prostheses and Implants

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