ArticleCartilage2013
Comparison of Three Methods to Quantify Repair Cartilage Collagen Orientation.
Article in Cartilage, 2013. 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, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Computer-assisted quantification of tumor-associated collagen signatures to improve the prognosis prediction of breast cancer.BMC medicine · 2021Article
- Quantitative mapping of acute and chronic PCL pathology with 3 T MRI: a prospectively enrolled patient cohort.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2019Article
- Pre-Clinical Translation of Second Harmonic Microscopy of Meniscal and Articular Cartilage Using a Prototype Nonlinear Microendoscope.IEEE journal of translational engineering in health and medicine · 2019Article
- Time efficient whole-brain coverage with MR Fingerprinting using slice-interleaved echo-planar-imaging.Scientific reports · 2018Article
- Next Generation Tissue Engineering of Orthopedic Soft Tissue-to-Bone Interfaces.MRS communications · 2017Article
- Image interpolation improves the zonal analysis of cartilage T2 relaxation in MRI.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2017Article
- Influence of acupuncture in treatment of knee osteoarthritis and cartilage repairing.American journal of translational research · 2016Article
- High-Resolution Methods for Diagnosing Cartilage Damage In Vivo.Cartilage · 2016Article
- A Novel Bone Marrow Stimulation Technique Augmented by Administration of Ultrapurified Alginate Gel Enhances Osteochondral Repair in a Rabbit Model.Tissue engineering. Part C, Methods · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe aim of this study was to determine if the noninvasive or minimally invasive and nondestructive imaging techniques of quantitative T2-mapping or multiphoton microscopy (MPM) respectively, could detect differences in cartilage collagen orientation similar to polarized light microscopy (PLM). It was hypothesized that MRI, MPM, and PLM would all detect quantitative differences between repair and normal cartilage tissue.
methodsOsteochondral defects in the medial femoral condyle were created and repaired in 5 mature goats. Postmortem, MRI with T2-mapping and histology were performed. T2 maps were generated and a mean T2 value was calculated for each region of interest. Histologic slides were assessed using MPM with measurements of autocorrelation ellipticity, and by PLM with application of a validated scoring method. Collagen orientation using each of the 3 modalities (T2-mapping, MPM, and PLM) was measured in the center of the repair tissue and compared to remote, normal cartilage.
resultsMRI, MPM, and PLM were able to detect a significant difference between repair and normal cartilage (n = 5). The average T2 value was longer for repair tissue (41.43 ± 9.81 ms) compared with normal cartilage (27.12 ± 14.22 ms; P = 0.04); MPM autocorrelation ellipticity was higher in fibrous tissue (3.75 ± 1.17) compared with normal cartilage (2.24 ± 0.51; P = 0.01); the average PLM score for repair tissue was lower (1.6 ± 1.02) than the score for remote normal cartilage (4.4 ± 0.42; P = 0.002). The strongest correlation among the methods was between MRI and PLM (r = -0.76; P = 0.01), followed by MPM and PLM (r = -0.58; P = 0.08), with the weakest correlation shown between MRI and MPM (r = 0.35; P = 0.31).
conclusionAll 3 imaging methods quantitatively measured differences in collagen orientation between repair and normal cartilage, but at very different levels of resolution. PLM is destructive to tissue and requires euthanasia, but because MPM can be used arthroscopically, both T2-mapping and MPM can be performed in vivo, offering nondestructive means to assess collagen orientation that could be used to obtain longitudinal data in cartilage repair studies.
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.