Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23696804›Full record

ArticlePloS one2013

Synthetic bone substitute engineered with amniotic epithelial cells enhances bone regeneration after maxillary sinus augmentation.

Barbara Barboni, Carlo Mangano, Luca Valbonetti, Giuseppe Marruchella, Paolo Berardinelli, Alessandra Martelli, Aurelio Muttini, Annunziata Mauro, Rossella Bedini, Maura Turriani and 6 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Amniotic Membrane and Amniotic Epithelial Cell Culture.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2024
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Human amniotic membrane for guided bone regeneration of calvarial defects in mice.Journal of materials science. Materials in medicine · 2018
    Article
  17. Craniofacial Tissue Engineering.Cold Spring Harbor perspectives in medicine · 2018
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

16 authors.

Barbara BarboniDepartment of Comparative Biomedical Science, University of Teramo, Teramo, Italy.
Carlo Mangano
Luca Valbonetti
Giuseppe Marruchella
Paolo Berardinelli
Alessandra Martelli
Aurelio Muttini
Annunziata Mauro
Rossella Bedini
Maura Turriani
Raffaella Pecci
Delia Nardinocchi
Vincenzo Luca Zizzari
Stefano Tetè
Adriano Piattelli
Mauro Mattioli

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEvidence has been provided that a cell-based therapy combined with the use of bioactive materials may significantly improve bone regeneration prior to dental implant, although the identification of an ideal source of progenitor/stem cells remains to be determined.

aimIn the present research, the bone regenerative property of an emerging source of progenitor cells, the amniotic epithelial cells (AEC), loaded on a calcium-phosphate synthetic bone substitute, made by direct rapid prototyping (rPT) technique, was evaluated in an animal study. MATERIAL AND

methodsTwo blocks of synthetic bone substitute (∼0.14 cm(3)), alone or engineered with 1×10(6) ovine AEC (oAEC), were grafted bilaterally into maxillary sinuses of six adult sheep, an animal model chosen for its high translational value in dentistry. The sheep were then randomly divided into two groups and sacrificed at 45 and 90 days post implantation (p.i.). Tissue regeneration was evaluated in the sinus explants by micro-computer tomography (micro-CT), morphological, morphometric and biochemical analyses. RESULTS AND

conclusionsThe obtained data suggest that scaffold integration and bone deposition are positively influenced by allotransplantated oAEC. Sinus explants derived from sheep grafted with oAEC engineered scaffolds displayed a reduced fibrotic reaction, a limited inflammatory response and an accelerated process of angiogenesis. In addition, the presence of oAEC significantly stimulated osteogenesis either by enhancing bone deposition or making more extent the foci of bone nucleation. Besides the modulatory role played by oAEC in the crucial events successfully guiding tissue regeneration (angiogenesis, vascular endothelial growth factor expression and inflammation), data provided herein show that oAEC were also able to directly participate in the process of bone deposition, as suggested by the presence of oAEC entrapped within the newly deposited osteoid matrix and by their ability to switch-on the expression of a specific bone-related protein (osteocalcin, OCN) when transplanted into host tissues.

Indexed as

Bone RegenerationBone SubstitutesAmniotic FluidAnimalsCells, CulturedEpithelial CellsGene ExpressionMaxillaMaxillary SinusSheep, DomesticTissue EngineeringTissue ScaffoldsVascular Endothelial Growth Factor AX-Ray MicrotomographyBone SubstitutesVascular Endothelial Growth Factor A

Identifiers

PMID23696804
PMCPMC3656960

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.