ArticleJournal of biomedical materials research. Part A2014
Remineralized bone matrix as a scaffold for bone tissue engineering.
Article in Journal of biomedical materials research. Part A, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Research Progress on Nanomaterials for Tissue Engineering in Oral Diseases.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2023Review
- Growth factor delivery using extracellular matrix-mimicking substrates for musculoskeletal tissue engineering and repair.Bioactive materials · 2021Review
- Tunability of collagen matrix mechanical properties via multiple modes of mineralization.Interface focus · 2016Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
There is a need for improved biomaterials for use in treating non-healing bone defects. A number of natural and synthetic biomaterials have been used for the regeneration of bone tissue with mixed results. One approach is to modify native tissue via decellularization or other treatment for use as natural scaffolding for tissue repair. In this study, our goal was to improve on our previously published alternating solution immersion (ASI) method to fabricate a robust, biocompatible, and mechanically competent biomaterial from natural demineralized bone matrix (DBM). The improved method includes an antigen removal (AR) treatment step which improves mineralization and stiffness while removing unwanted proteins. The chemistry of the mineral in the remineralized bone matrix (RBM) was consistent with dicalcium phosphate dihydrate (brushite), a material used clinically in bone healing applications. Mass spectrometry identified proteins removed from the matrix with AR treatment to include α-2 HS-glycoprotein and osteopontin, noncollagenous proteins (NCPs) and known inhibitors of biomineralization. Additionally, the RBM supported the survival, proliferation, and differentiation of human mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) in vitro as well or better than other widely used biomaterials including DBM and PLG scaffolds. DNA content increased more than 10-fold on RBM compared to DBM and PLG; likewise, osteogenic gene expression was significantly increased after 1 and 2 weeks. We demonstrated that ASI remineralization has the capacity to fabricate mechanically stiff and biocompatible RBM, a suitable biomaterial for cell culture applications.
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.