ArticleTissue engineering. Part A2014
In vivo skeletal muscle biocompatibility of composite, coaxial electrospun, and microfibrous scaffolds.
Article in Tissue engineering. Part A, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Histological evaluation of cellular response to a multifilament electrospun suture for tendon repair.PloS one · 2020Article
- Biomaterials in Tendon and Skeletal Muscle Tissue Engineering: Current Trends and Challenges.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2018Review
- A pharmacokinetic model of a tissue implantable insulin sensor.Advanced healthcare materials · 2015Article
- Tissue engineered scaffolds for an effective healing and regeneration: reviewing orthotopic studies.BioMed research international · 2014Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
One weakness with currently researched skeletal muscle tissue replacement is the lack of contraction and relaxation during the regenerative process. A biocompatible scaffold that can act similar to the muscle would be a pivotal innovation. Coaxial electrospun scaffolds, capable of movement with electrical stimulation, were created using poly(ɛ-caprolactone) (PCL), multiwalled carbon nanotubes (MWCNT), and a (83/17 or 40/60) poly(acrylic acid)/poly(vinyl alcohol) (PAA/PVA) hydrogel. The two scaffolds were implanted into Sprague-Dawley rat vastus lateralis muscle and compared with a phosphate-buffered saline injection sham surgery and an unoperated control. No complications or adverse effects were observed. Rats were sacrificed on days 7, 14, 21, and 28 postimplantation and biocompatibility assessed using enzymatic activity, fibrosis formation, inflammation, scaffold cellular infiltration, and neovascularization. Serum creatine kinase and lactate dehydrogenase levels were significantly higher in scaffold-implanted rats compared with the control on day 7, but returned to baseline by day 14. Day 7 scaffolds showed significant inflammation and fibrosis that decreased over time. Fibroblasts infiltrated the scaffolds early, but decreased with time, while myogenic cell numbers increased. Neovascularization of both scaffolds occurred as early as day 7. We conclude that the PCL-MWCNT-PAA/PVA scaffolds are biocompatible and suitable for muscle regeneration as myogenic cell growth was supported.
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.