| Title |
Alterations in the endometrium of rats, rabbits, and Macaca mulatta that received an implantation of copper/low-density polyethylene nanocomposite
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Nanomedicine, February 2014
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ijn.s56756 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Li-Xia Hu, Hong Wang, Meng Rao, Xiao-Ling Zhao, Jing Yang, Shi-Fu Hu, Jing He, Wei Xia, Hefang Liu, Bo Zhen, Haihong Di, Changsheng Xie, Xianping Xia, Changhong Zhu |
| Abstract |
A copper/low-density polyethylene nanocomposite (nano-Cu/LDPE), a potential intrauterine device component material, has been developed from our research. A logical extension of our previous work, this study was conducted to investigate the expression of plasminogen activator inhibitor 1 (PAI-1), substance P (SP), and substance P receptor (SP-R) in the endometrium of Sprague Dawley rats, New Zealand White rabbits, and Macaca mulatta implanted with nano-Cu/LDPE composite. The influence of the nano-Cu/LDPE composite on the morphology of the endometrium was also investigated. Animals were randomly divided into five groups: the sham-operated control group (SO group), bulk copper group (Cu group), LDPE group, and nano-Cu/LDPE groups I and II. An expression of PAI-1, SP, and SP-R in the endometrial tissues was examined by immunohistochemistry at day 30, 60, 90, and 180 postimplantation. The significant difference for PAI-1, SP, and SP-R between the nano-Cu/LDPE groups and the SO group (P<0.05) was identified when the observation period was terminated, and the changes of nano-Cu/LDPE on these parameters were less remarkable than those of the Cu group (P<0.05). The damage to the endometrial morphology caused by the nano-Cu/LDPE composite was much less than that caused by bulk copper. The nano-Cu/LDPE composite might be a potential substitute for conventional materials for intrauterine devices in the future because of its decreased adverse effects on the endometrial microenvironment. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 3 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Peru | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 15 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 19% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 13% |
| Other | 1 | 6% |
| Professor | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 3 | 19% |
| Unknown | 3 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 19% |
| Materials Science | 3 | 19% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 13% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 13% |
| Chemistry | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 4 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 December 2023.
All research outputs
#4,239,463
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#323
of 4,123 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#47,786
of 322,707 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#5
of 106 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,123 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 322,707 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 106 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.