Cited by 50Tissue Engineering and Regenerative MedicineNeuroscience and Neural EngineeringSurgical Sutures and Adhesives

Analyte flux through chronically implanted subcutaneous polyamide membranes differs in humans and rats

Wisniewski, N., Rajamand, N., Adamsson, U., Lins, P. E., Reichert, W. M., Klitzman, B., Ungerstedt, U.·2002·American Journal of Physiology-Endocrinology and Metabolism

Abstract

The rat is commonly used to evaluate physiological responses of subcutaneous tissue to implanted devices. In vivo longevity of various devices and the biocompatibility of biomaterials depend on how adjacent tissue interacts. How closely the rat model predicts the human response has not been well characterized. The objective of this study was to compare rat and human subcutaneous foreign body responses by monitoring the biochemical environment at a polymer-tissue interface over 8 days using microdialysis. Polyamide microdialysis probes were implanted subcutaneously in humans and rats ( n = 12). Daily microdialysis samples were analyzed for glucose, lactate, pyruvate, glycerol, and urea. Blood glucose was also monitored. Analyte concentrations differed significantly between rats and humans at the implant-tissue interface. There were also qualitative differences in the 8-day trends. For example, over 8 days, microdialysate glucose increased two- to fourfold in humans but decreased in rats ( P < 0.001). This study reveals profound physiological differences at material-tissue interfaces in rats and humans and highlights the need for caution when extrapolating subcutaneous rat biocompatibility data to humans.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1152/ajpendo.00259.2001

Cites

25 of 25 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 ratio of dialysate glucose to blood glucose was significantly different between rats and humans, indicating differences in relative glucose availability in tissue surrounding an implanted device.

    “the ratio of the glucose concentration in the dialysate to that in blood were significantly different between rats and humans indicating differences in the relative glucose availability in the tissue surrounding an implanted device.126”
  • Dialysate concentrations of glucose, pyruvate, lactate, glycerol, and urea at a microdialysis probe-tissue interface were significantly different between rats and humans throughout the first 6 days, except for glycerol on day 0.

    “The dialysate concentrations were significantly different for all metabolites in rats and humans throughout the first 6 days of the experiment, with the exception of glycerol on day 0.126”
  • Human subcutaneous tissue had a high concentration of adipose cells, whereas rat tissue had larger amounts of collagen.

    “Histology samplings from human subcutaneous tissue showed a high concentration of adipose cells while rat tissue was characterized with larger amounts of collagen.126”
  • These results require caution when extrapolating results from animal models to humans.

    “Taken together, these results necessitate careful consideration and caution when extrapolating results from animal models to humans.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wisniewski, N., Rajamand, N., Adamsson, U., Lins, P. E., Reichert, W. M., Klitzman, B., & Ungerstedt, U.
Affiliations
  • Departments of Biomedical Engineering and
  • Department of Physiology and Pharmacology, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm S-17177; and
  • Danderyds sjukhus (SE)
  • Duke University (US)
  • Karolinska Institutet (SE)
Venue
American Journal of Physiology-Endocrinology and Metabolism
Published
2002-06-01
Volume
282
Issue
6
Pages
E1316-E1323
ISSN
  • 0193-1849 (ISSN-L)
  • 1522-1555
OpenAlex
W2161380946
Cited by
50
References
25
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 3
FWCI
1.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • American Journal of Physiology-Endocrinology and Metabolism (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (DK54932)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neural Engineering
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Surgical Sutures and Adhesives
Keywords
polyamide membranes, biocompatibility, human-rat comparison, microdialysis, implant-tissue interface, glucose, lactate, pyruvate, glycerol, urea, blood glucose, biomaterials
MeSH terms
Adult, Animals, Biocompatible Materials, Blood Glucose, Glucose, Glycerol, Humans, Male, Membranes, Artificial, Microscopy, Electron, Nylons, Species Specificity, Time Factors, Urea, Rats, Sprague-Dawley, Microdialysis, Pyruvic Acid, Lactic Acid, Prostheses and Implants, Rats

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