Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21764438›Full record

ReviewBiomaterials2011

The knee meniscus: structure-function, pathophysiology, current repair techniques, and prospects for regeneration.

Eleftherios A Makris, Pasha Hadidi, Kyriacos A Athanasiou

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Biomaterials, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 457 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
457citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
27.1field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

457 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 1,066 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Identification and characterization of POSTNJournal of orthopaedic translation · 2026
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review

397 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Eleftherios A MakrisDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, University of California, Davis, Davis, CA 95616, USA.
Pasha Hadidi
Kyriacos A Athanasiou
University of California, Davis · US

Funding

Toward Tissue Engineering of the Knee MeniscusR01AR047839 · NIAMS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT DAVIS · PI ATHANASIOU, KYRIACOS A · 2003 to 2010
$2.1M
NIAMS NIH HHS R01 AR047839
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Extensive scientific investigations in recent decades have established the anatomical, biomechanical, and functional importance that the meniscus holds within the knee joint. As a vital part of the joint, it acts to prevent the deterioration and degeneration of articular cartilage, and the onset and development of osteoarthritis. For this reason, research into meniscus repair has been the recipient of particular interest from the orthopedic and bioengineering communities. Current repair techniques are only effective in treating lesions located in the peripheral vascularized region of the meniscus. Healing lesions found in the inner avascular region, which functions under a highly demanding mechanical environment, is considered to be a significant challenge. An adequate treatment approach has yet to be established, though many attempts have been undertaken. The current primary method for treatment is partial meniscectomy, which commonly results in the progressive development of osteoarthritis. This drawback has shifted research interest toward the fields of biomaterials and bioengineering, where it is hoped that meniscal deterioration can be tackled with the help of tissue engineering. So far, different approaches and strategies have contributed to the in vitro generation of meniscus constructs, which are capable of restoring meniscal lesions to some extent, both functionally as well as anatomically. The selection of the appropriate cell source (autologous, allogeneic, or xenogeneic cells, or stem cells) is undoubtedly regarded as key to successful meniscal tissue engineering. Furthermore, a large variation of scaffolds for tissue engineering have been proposed and produced in experimental and clinical studies, although a few problems with these (e.g., byproducts of degradation, stress shielding) have shifted research interest toward new strategies (e.g., scaffoldless approaches, self-assembly). A large number of different chemical (e.g., TGF-β1, C-ABC) and mechanical stimuli (e.g., direct compression, hydrostatic pressure) have also been investigated, both in terms of encouraging functional tissue formation, as well as in differentiating stem cells. Even though the problems accompanying meniscus tissue engineering research are considerable, we are undoubtedly in the dawn of a new era, whereby recent advances in biology, engineering, and medicine are leading to the successful treatment of meniscal lesions.

Indexed as

RegenerationAnimalsBiomechanical PhenomenaHumansMenisci, TibialTissue EngineeringTissue Scaffolds

Identifiers

PMID21764438
PMCPMC3161498
OpenAlexW2003328208

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.