ArticleTissue engineering. Part A2016
Assessment of Methods for Rapid Intraoperative Concentration and Selection of Marrow-Derived Connective Tissue Progenitors for Bone Regeneration Using the Canine Femoral Multidefect Model.
Article in Tissue engineering. Part A, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Intraoperative Creation of Tissue-Engineered Grafts with Minimally Manipulated Cells: New Concept of Bone Tissue Engineering In Situ.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Evaluation of Autologously Derived Biomaterials and Stem Cells for Bone Tissue Engineering.Tissue engineering. Part A · 2020Article
- Comparison and characterization of enriched mesenchymal stem cells obtained by the repeated filtration of autologous bone marrow through porous biomaterials.Journal of translational medicine · 2019Article
- Optimizing Clinical Use of Biologics in Orthopaedic Surgery: Consensus Recommendations From the 2018 AAOS/NIH U-13 Conference.The Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons · 2019Article
- Article
- The biological basis for concentrated iliac crest aspirate to enhance core decompression in the treatment of osteonecrosis.International orthopaedics · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Treatment of large bone defects remains an unsolved clinical challenge, despite a wide array of existing bone graft materials and strategies. Local deficiency in osteogenic connective tissue progenitors (CTP-Os) due to tissue loss is one of the central biological barriers to bone regeneration. Density separation (DS) and selective retention (SR) represent two promising methods that can be used intraoperatively to rapidly concentrate cells and potentially select CTP-Os. This project was designed to compare DS and SR using the canine femoral multidefect (CFMD) model. Mineralized cancellous allograft (MCA) was used as a standardized scaffold for cell transplantation. Two experiments were performed using a cohort of six animals in each comparison. In Cohort I, unprocessed bone marrow aspirate (BMA) clot was compared to DS processing. MCA combined with raw BMA or DS processed cells produced a robust and advanced stage of bone regeneration throughout the defect in 4 weeks with reconstitution of hematopoietic marrow. However, the retention of DS processed cells and CTP-Os in the MCA matrix was low compared to BMA clot. In Cohort II, MCA with DS-T cells (addition of calcium chloride thrombin to induce clotting and enhance cell and CTP-O retention) was compared to MCA with SR cells. A mean of 276 ± 86 million nucleated cells and 29,030 ± 10,510 CTP-Os were implanted per defect in the DS-T group. A mean of 76 ± 42 million nucleated cells and 30,266 ± 15,850 CTP-Os were implanted in the SR group. Bone formation was robust and not different between treatments. Histologically, both groups demonstrated regeneration of hematopoietic marrow tissue. However, SR sites contained more hematopoietic vascular tissues, less fibrosis, and less residual allograft, particularly in the intramedullary cavity, suggesting a more advanced stage of remodeling (p = 0.04). These data demonstrate excellent overall performance of DS and SR processing methods. Both methods achieve a bone regeneration response that approaches the limits of performance that can be achieved in the CFMD model. Further advancement and comparison of these intraoperative bone marrow cell processing methods will require use of a larger and more biologically compromised defect site to guide the next steps of preclinical development and optimization.
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.