ReviewAnnals of biomedical engineering2015
Native, living tissues as cell seeded scaffolds.
Review in Annals of biomedical engineering, 2015. 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.
- The Application of Bioreactors for Cartilage Tissue Engineering: Advances, Limitations, and Future Perspectives.Stem cells international · 2021Review
- Contribution of Implanted, Genetically Modified Muscle Progenitor Cells Expressing BMP-2 to New Bone Formation in a Rat Osseous Defect.Molecular therapy : the journal of the American Society of Gene Therapy · 2018Article
- Stem Cells for Bone Regeneration: From Cell-Based Therapies to Decellularised Engineered Extracellular Matrices.Stem cells international · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
Much effort is expended in developing biomimetic scaffolds that provide the micro-architecture of native tissue with appropriate cellular niches. Such scaffolds are often seeded with progenitor cells to generate engineered replacements for diseased or damaged tissues. An alternative approach relies on biology, rather than technology, to provide scaffolds containing progenitor cells in authentic niches. This article describes the use of accessible living tissues containing endogenous progenitor cells in their native, physiological environments. Such tissues also possess scaffolding properties, and can be readily harvested, manipulated and returned to the patient intra-operatively to facilitate repair and regeneration. Our group has explored the in situ genetic manipulation of cells within these tissues before they are reimplanted, although other means of modulation are certainly possible. Examples of suitable donor tissues include marrow, skeletal muscle and fat. In the case of marrow, clotting produces a moldable, autologous fibrin matrix containing endogenous cells; if necessary, exogenous cells can be added prior to clotting. These approaches have been studied experimentally in orthopaedic contexts, particularly for the healing and regeneration of bone and cartilage.
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.