Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24168395›Full record

ReviewTissue engineering. Part B, Reviews2014

Three-dimensional aggregates of mesenchymal stem cells: cellular mechanisms, biological properties, and applications.

Sébastien Sart, Ang-Chen Tsai, Yan Li, Teng Ma

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Tissue engineering. Part B, Reviews, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 198 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
198citing 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

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

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

138 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

4 authors.

Sébastien SartDepartment of Chemical and Biomedical Engineering, FAMU-FSU College of Engineering, Florida State University , Tallahassee, Florida.
Ang-Chen Tsai
Yan Li
Teng Ma

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) are primary candidates in cell therapy and tissue engineering and are being tested in clinical trials for a wide range of diseases. Originally isolated and expanded as plastic adherent cells, MSCs have intriguing properties of in vitro self-assembly into three-dimensional (3D) aggregates reminiscent of skeletal condensation in vivo. Recent studies have shown that MSC 3D aggregation improved a range of biological properties, including multilineage potential, secretion of therapeutic factors, and resistance against ischemic condition. Hence, the formation of 3D MSC aggregates has been explored as a novel strategy to improve cell delivery, functional activation, and in vivo retention to enhance therapeutic outcomes. This article summarizes recent reports of MSC aggregate self-assembly, characterization of biological properties, and their applications in preclinical models. The cellular and molecular mechanisms underlying MSC aggregate formation and functional activation are discussed, and the areas that warrant further investigation are highlighted. These analyses are combined to provide perspectives for identifying the controlling mechanisms and refining the methods of aggregate fabrication and expansion for clinical applications.

Indexed as

AnimalsBioreactorsCell AggregationCell ProliferationHumansMesenchymal Stem CellsModels, AnimalTissue Engineering

Identifiers

PMID24168395
PMCPMC4185975

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.