Cited by 52Wound Healing and TreatmentsOrthopedic Infections and TreatmentsDental Implant Techniques and Outcomes

Implant Healing in Experimental Animal Models of Diabetes

Open access
Le, Nga N., Rose, Michael B., Levinson, Howard, Klitzman, Bruce·2011·Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology

Abstract

Diabetes mellitus is becoming increasingly prevalent worldwide. Additionally, there is an increasing number of patients receiving implantable devices such as glucose sensors and orthopedic implants. Thus, it is likely that the number of diabetic patients receiving these devices will also increase. Even though implantable medical devices are considered biocompatible by the Food and Drug Administration, the adverse tissue healing that occurs adjacent to these foreign objects is a leading cause of their failure. This foreign body response leads to fibrosis, encapsulation of the device, and a reduction or cessation of device performance. A second adverse event is microbial infection of implanted devices, which can lead to persistent local and systemic infections and also exacerbates the fibrotic response. Nearly half of all nosocomial infections are associated with the presence of an indwelling medical device. Events associated with both the foreign body response and implant infection can necessitate device removal and may lead to amputation, which is associated with significant morbidity and cost. Diabetes mellitus is generally indicated as a risk factor for the infection of a variety of implants such as prosthetic joints, pacemakers, implantable cardioverter defibrillators, penile implants, and urinary catheters. Implant infection rates in diabetic patients vary depending upon the implant and the microorganism, however, for example, diabetes was found to be a significant variable associated with a nearly 7.2% infection rate for implantable cardioverter defibrillators by the microorganism Candida albicans. While research has elucidated many of the altered mechanisms of diabetic cutaneous wound healing, the internal healing adjacent to indwelling medical devices in a diabetic model has rarely been studied. Understanding this healing process is crucial to facilitating improved device design. The purpose of this article is to summarize the physiologic factors that Influence wound healing and infection in diabetic patients, to review research concerning diabetes and biomedical implants and device infection, and to critically analyze which diabetic animal model might be advantageous for assessing internal healing adjacent to implanted devices.

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 · 10.1177/193229681100500315

Cites

63 of 63 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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 wide range of available diabetic animal models may complicate comparisons between studies.

    “the wide range of available diabetic models in animals (e.g., genetic or chemically induced) may further complicate comparisons between studies.129”

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Le, N. N., Rose, M. B., Levinson, H., & Klitzman, B.
Affiliations
Duke University (US)
Corresponding author
Klitzman, Bruce
Venue
Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology
Published
2011-05
Volume
5
Issue
3
Pages
605-618
ISSN
1932-2968 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2057535463
Cited by
52
References
63
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 1
Type
conference abstract
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DukeSpace (Duke University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
  • National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (DK54932)
  • National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering (EB 000708, R01EB000708)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rehabilitation › Wound Healing and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Orthopedic Infections and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Dentistry › Oral Surgery › Dental Implant Techniques and Outcomes
Keywords
diabetes mellitus, implant healing, foreign body reaction, implant-associated infection, animal models of diabetes, wound healing, fibrosis, device encapsulation, biomedical implants, Candida albicans, nosocomial infections
MeSH terms
Animals, Blood Glucose, Candidiasis, Cross Infection, Fibrosis, Humans, Orthopedics, Prosthesis Failure, Wound Healing, Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring, Biosensing Techniques, Cytokines, Defibrillators, Implantable, Prostheses and Implants, Intercellular Signaling Peptides and Proteins, Diabetes Complications

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