Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21902612›Full record

ReviewTissue engineering. Part B, Reviews2011

Cell sources for bone tissue engineering: insights from basic science.

Céline Colnot

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Tissue engineering. Part B, Reviews, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 47 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
47citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

47 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

1 author.

Céline ColnotINSERM U781, Tour Lavoisier 2ème étage, Hôpital Necker-Enfants Malades, Paris, France. celine.colnot@inserm.fr

Funding

Functional roles of muscle in bone repairR01AR057344 · NIAMS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI MICLAU, THEODORE · 2010 to 2014
$1.7M
NIAMS NIH HHS R01 AR057344
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

One of the goals of bone tissue engineering is to design delivery methods for skeletal stem/progenitor cells to repair or replace bone. Although the materials used to retain cells play a central role in the quality of the constructs, the source of cells is key for bone regeneration. Bone marrow is the most common cell source, but other tissues are now being explored, such as the periosteum, fat, muscle, cord blood, and embryonic or induced pluripotent stem cells. The therapeutic effect of exogenous stem/progenitor cells is accepted, yet their contribution to bone repair is not well defined. The in vitro osteo- and/or chondrogenic potential of these skeletal progenitors do not necessarily predict their differentiation potential in vivo and their function may be affected by their ability to home correctly to bone. This review provides an overview of animal models used to test the efficacy of cell-based approaches. We examine the mechanisms of endogenous cell recruitment during bone repair and compare the role of local versus systemic cell recruitment. We discuss how the normal repair process can help define efficacious cell sources for bone tissue engineering and improve their methods of delivery.

Indexed as

AnimalsBone and BonesBone Marrow CellsHumansTissue EngineeringWound Healing

Identifiers

PMID21902612
PMCPMC3223018

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.