Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26481914›Full record

ReviewImmunologic research2015

Immunology and cartilage regeneration.

Benjamin Smith, Ian R Sigal, Daniel A Grande

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Immunologic research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 38 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Benjamin SmithOrthopedic Research Laboratory, The Feinstein Institute for Medical Research, 350 Community Drive, Manhasset, NY, 11030, USA.
Ian R SigalOrthopedic Research Laboratory, The Feinstein Institute for Medical Research, 350 Community Drive, Manhasset, NY, 11030, USA.
Daniel A GrandeOrthopedic Research Laboratory, The Feinstein Institute for Medical Research, 350 Community Drive, Manhasset, NY, 11030, USA. dgrande@nshs.edu.
Feinstein Institute for Medical Research · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The intrinsic regenerative capacity of avascular cartilage is limited. Cartilage injuries result in chronic, non-healing lesions requiring surgical management. Frequently, these surgical techniques make use of allogeneic cells and tissues. This review discusses the immune status of these materials. Cartilage allografts, often used in orthopedic and plastic surgeries, have rarely provoked a significant immune response. In whole cartilage transplants, the dense matrix produced by chondrocytes inhibits lymphocyte migration, preventing immune detection rendering them "antigen sequestered." It is unclear whether isolated chondrocytes are immune-privileged; chondrocytes express immune inhibitory B7 molecules, indicating that they have some ability to modulate immune reactions. Allogeneic cartilage grafts often involve a bony portion often retaining immunogenic cells and proteins-to facilitate good surgical attachment and concern that this may enhance inflammation and immune rejection. However, studies of failed cartilage grafts have not found immune responses to be a contributing factor. Meniscus allografts, which also retain a bony portion, raise similar concerns as cartilage allografts. Despite this, the plugs improved patient outcomes, indicating that the immunological effects were not clinically significant. Finally, allogeneic mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) also are being investigated as a treatment for cartilage damage. MSCs have been demonstrated to have unique immunomodulatory properties including their ability to reduce immune cell infiltration and to modulate inflammation. In summary, the immunogenic properties of cartilage vary with the type of allograft used: Cartilage allografts demonstrate active immune-suppressive mechanisms as evidenced by lack of allograft rejection, while MSC allografts appear to be safe for transplantation.

Indexed as

Tissue TransplantationAllograftsAnimalsCartilageChondrocytesGraft RejectionGuided Tissue RegenerationHumansImmune ToleranceMatrilin ProteinsMatrilin ProteinsAllograftCartilageChondrocyteOsteochondralTransplantation

Identifiers

PMID26481914
OpenAlexW2153315660

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.