ArticleCurrent reviews in musculoskeletal medicine2015
The state of cartilage regeneration: current and future technologies.
Article in Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Stem Cells and their Key Derivatives in Degenerative Musculoskeletal Diseases.Stem cell reviews and reports · 2026Review
- Mesenchymal stromal cells in age-related neurodegenerative disorders: mechanisms, translational barriers, and precision strategies.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- Mesenchymal stem cells in treating human diseases: molecular mechanisms and clinical studies.Signal transduction and targeted therapy · 2025Review
- Melatonin ameliorates age-related sarcopenia by inhibiting fibrogenic conversion of satellite cell.Molecular medicine (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2024Article
- Impact of Hyaluronic Acid on the Viability of Mesenchymal Cells Derived from Adipose Tissue Grown in Collagen Type I/III Membrane.Revista brasileira de ortopedia · 2022Article
- Arthroscopic Autologous Chondrocyte Bone Grafting of a Lateral Tibial Plateau Chondral Defect.Arthroscopy techniques · 2021Article
- Current hip cartilage regeneration/repair modalities: a scoping review of biologics and surgery.International orthopaedics · 2021Article
- Bioprinting of osteochondral tissues: A perspective on current gaps and future trends.International journal of bioprinting · 2017Article
- Regenerative approaches for the treatment of early OA.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2016Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
It is clear that mature human articular cartilage does not have the innate ability to regenerate. Due to this, much effort has been put forth to work on bestowing this ability. While early data focused on more basic outcomes such as percentage of defect fill, the tissue formed was a "cartilage scar" or "hyaline-like" tissue. Even with more advanced technologies, it is clear that no current procedure is able to reconstitute the native structure and function of true hyaline cartilage. As research advancement has somewhat plateaued in this regard, it is crucial that future work focuses on a multifactorial approach, treating the joint as an organ system. The purpose of this review is to update readers on the most recent literature and controversies surrounding articular cartilage regeneration. Specific focus will be placed on current technologies available in the USA and the basic science to support them.
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.