ArticlePloS one2013
The cellular immune mechanism after transfer of chemically extracted acellular nerve xenografts.
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 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Functionalized α-Helical Peptide Hydrogels for Neural Tissue Engineering.ACS biomaterials science & engineering · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Severe peripheral nerve defect by injuries causing functional loss require nerve grafting. Autograft has limitations for clinical use because it results in the creation of a new nerve injury and the generation of donor site morbidity. Based on these limitations, nerve allografts and xenografts provide a readily accessible alternative strategy. The aim of the present study was to observe the immune mechanism underlying the rejection of chemically extracted acellular nerve xenografts, and further evaluate immunogenicity of chemically treated acellular nerve grafts for clinical applications. A total of 160 BALB/c mice were randomly divided into a negative contrast group (NC, 40 mice), a fresh autograft group (AG, 40 mice), a fresh xenogeneic nerve group (FXN, 40 mice) and a chemically extracted acellular xenogeneic nerve group (CEXN, 40 mice). Various types of nerve grafts were implanted into the thigh muscle of BALB/C mice in the corresponding groups. At 3, 7, 14 and 28 days post-operation, the mice (10 mice from each group) were sacrificed and their spleens were extracted. The spleens were ground into paste. The erythrocytes and other cells were lysed using distilled water and the T lymphocytes were collected. Fluorescein isothiocyanate (FITC) -labeled monoclonal antibodies (CD3, CD4, CD8, CD25, IL-2, IFN-γ and TNF-α) were then added to the solution. The Fluorescence Activated Cell Sorting (FACS) was used to determine the positivity rate of the cells combined with the monoclonal antibodies above. No significant statistical differences were observed between the CEXN, NC and AG groups, so that no obvious immune rejections were observed among the chemically extracted acellular nerve xenografts.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.