ArticleThe Journal of veterinary medical science2015
The canine epiphyseal-derived mesenchymal stem cells are comparable to bone marrow derived-mesenchymal stem cells.
Article in The Journal of veterinary medical science, 2015. 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, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Skeletal stem cells, a new direction for the treatment of bone and joint diseases.World journal of orthopedics · 2025Review
- Topical applications of allogeneic adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells ameliorate the canine keratoconjunctivitis sicca.BMC veterinary research · 2022Article
- Comparative characteristic study from bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells.Journal of veterinary science · 2021Review
- To Protect and to Preserve: Novel Preservation Strategies for Extracellular Vesicles.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2018Review
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) hold great potential in cell therapy and have attracted increasing interests in a wide range of biomedical sciences. However, the scarcity of MSCs and the prolonged isolation procedure limited the clinical application. To address these 2 issues, we developed a method to isolate MSCs from bone biopsy tissues of euthanized canine body donors. Compared to the traditional method to isolate MSCs from aspirated bone marrow (BMSCs), the isolation procedure for MSCs from harvested epiphyseal cancellous bone (EMSCs) was less time-consuming. The isolated EMSCs had similar plastic-adherence, tri-lineage differentiation and consistent surface marker profiles compared to BMSCs. We harvested BMSCs and EMSCs from 24 euthanized cases from clinics and 42 euthanized donors from a local shelter. The successful rate for EMSC isolation is significantly higher compared to BMSC isolation, while the other properties of the isolated MSCs including the clonogenicity, proliferative potentials and molecular phenotypes were not discernibly different between the MSCs established by the two methods. In conclusion, we demonstrated a new procedure to harvest MSCs by bone biopsy at the epiphyseal region. This method is less time consuming and more reliable, and the resulting MSCs are comparable to those harvested by bone marrow aspiration. The combination of the two methods can greatly improve the efficiency to harvest MSCs.
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.