The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Safety Considerations for Graphene: Lessons Learnt from Carbon Nanotubes
Open accessAbstract
Many consider carbon nanomaterials the poster children of nanotechnology, attracting immense scientific interest from many disciplines and offering tremendous potential in a diverse range of applications due to their extraordinary properties. Graphene is the youngest in the family of carbon nanomaterials. Its isolation, description, and mass fabrication has followed that of fullerenes and carbon nanotubes. Graphene's development and its adoption by many industries will increase unintended or intentional human exposure, creating the need to determine its safety profile. In this Account, we compare the lessons learned from the development of carbon nanotubes with what is known about graphene, based on our own investigations and those of others. Despite both being carbon-based, nanotubes and graphene are two very distinct nanomaterials. We consider the key physicochemical characteristics (structure, surface, colloidal properties) for graphene and carbon nanotubes at three different physiological levels: cellular, tissue, and whole body. We summarize the evidence for health effects of both materials at all three levels. Overall, graphene and its derivatives are characterized by a lower aspect ratio, larger surface area, and better dispersibility in most solvents compared to carbon nanotubes. Dimensions, surface chemistry, and impurities are equally important for graphene and carbon nanotubes in determining both mechanistic (aggregation, cellular processes, biodistribution, and degradation kinetics) and toxicological outcomes. Colloidal dispersions of individual graphene sheets (or graphene oxide and other derivatives) can easily be engineered without metallic impurities, with high stability and less aggregation. Very importantly, graphene nanostructures are not fiber-shaped. These features theoretically offer significant advantages in terms of safety over inhomogeneous dispersions of fiber-shaped carbon nanotubes. However, studies that directly compare graphene with carbon nanotubes are rare, making comparative considerations of their overall safety and risk assessment challenging. In this Account, we attempt to offer a set of rules for the development of graphene and its derivatives to enhance their overall safety and minimize the risks for adverse reactions in humans from exposure. These rules are: (1) to use small, individual graphene sheets that macrophages in the body can efficiently internalize and remove from the site of deposition; (2) to use hydrophilic, stable, colloidal dispersions of graphene sheets to minimize aggregation in vivo; and (3) to use excretable graphene material or chemically-modified graphene that can be degraded effectively. Such rules can only act as guidelines at this early stage in the development of graphene-based technologies, yet they offer a set of design principles for the fabrication and safe use of graphene material that will come in contact with the human body. In a broader context, the safety risks associated with graphene materials will be entirely dependent on the specific types of graphene materials and how they are investigated or applied. Therefore, generalizations about the toxicity of "graphene" as a whole will be inaccurate, possibly misleading, and should be avoided.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Graphene: Status and Prospects
Geim, A. K. (2009) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1158877 · Cited by 13,942
Cited by
Role of nanomaterials in water treatment applications: A review
Santhosh, C., Velmurugan, V., Jacob, G., Jeong, S. K., Grace, A. N., & Bhatnagar, A. (2016) · Chemical Engineering Journal · doi:10.1016/j.cej.2016.08.053 · Cited by 1,256
Nanotoxicity of Graphene and Graphene Oxide
Seabra, A. B., Paula, A. J., de Lima, R., Alves, O. L., & Durán, N. (2014) · Chemical Research in Toxicology · doi:10.1021/tx400385x · Cited by 893
Classification Framework for Graphene‐Based Materials
Wick, P., Louw‐Gaume, A. E., Kucki, M., Krug, H. F., Kostarelos, K., Fadeel, B., Dawson, K. A., Salvati, A., Vázquez, E., Ballerini, L., et al. (2014) · Angewandte Chemie International Edition · doi:10.1002/anie.201403335 · Cited by 470
Self-citationBiological interactions of carbon-based nanomaterials: From coronation to degradation
Bhattacharya, K., Mukherjee, S. P., Gallud, A., Burkert, S. C., Bistarelli, S., Bellucci, S., Bottini, M., Star, A., & Fadeel, B. (2016) · Nanomedicine: Nanotechnology, Biology and Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.nano.2015.11.011 · Cited by 402
Enhanced Osteogenesis by Reduced Graphene Oxide/Hydroxyapatite Nanocomposites
Lee, J. H., Shin, Y. C., Lee, S.-M., Jin, O. S., Kang, S. H., Hong, S. W., Jeong, C.-M., Huh, J. B., & Han, D.-W. (2015) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/srep18833 · Cited by 258
Nanotechnology-based water quality management for wastewater treatment
Madhura, L., Singh, S., Kanchi, S., Sabela, M., Bisetty, K., & Inamuddin (2019) · Environmental Chemistry Letters · doi:10.1007/s10311-018-0778-8 · Cited by 167
The asbestos-carbon nanotube analogy: An update
Kane, A. B., Hurt, R. H., & Gao, H. (2018) · Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology · doi:10.1016/j.taap.2018.06.027 · Cited by 106
Metadata
- Authors
- Bussy, C., Ali-Boucetta, H., & Kostarelos, K.
- Venue
- Accounts of Chemical Research
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 2012-11-20
- Volume
- 46
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 692-701
- ISSN
- 0001-4842 (ISSN-L)
- 1520-4898
- OpenAlex
- W1964079668
- Cited by
- 322
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 13.25
- 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
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.