Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26932531›Full record

ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2016

Establishment of a preclinical ovine screening model for the investigation of bone tissue engineering strategies in cancellous and cortical bone defects.

Anne-Marie Pobloth, Kenneth A Johnson, Hanna Schell, Nicolai Kolarczik, Dag Wulsten, Georg N Duda, Katharina Schmidt-Bleek

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. An overview of de novo bone generation in animal models.Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society · 2021
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Anne-Marie PoblothJulius Wolff Institute and Center for Musculoskeletal Surgery, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Augustenburger Platz 1, D-13353, Berlin, Germany. anne-marie.pobloth@charite.de.
Kenneth A JohnsonFaculty of Veterinary Science, University of Sydney, Sydney, 2006, NSW, Australia. kenneth.johnson@sydney.edu.au.
Hanna SchellJulius Wolff Institute and Center for Musculoskeletal Surgery, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Augustenburger Platz 1, D-13353, Berlin, Germany. hanna.schell@charite.de.
Nicolai KolarczikJulius Wolff Institute and Center for Musculoskeletal Surgery, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Augustenburger Platz 1, D-13353, Berlin, Germany. nicolai.kolarczik@charite.de.
Dag WulstenJulius Wolff Institute and Center for Musculoskeletal Surgery, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Augustenburger Platz 1, D-13353, Berlin, Germany.
Georg N DudaJulius Wolff Institute and Center for Musculoskeletal Surgery, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Augustenburger Platz 1, D-13353, Berlin, Germany. georg.duda@charite.de.
Katharina Schmidt-BleekJulius Wolff Institute and Center for Musculoskeletal Surgery, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Augustenburger Platz 1, D-13353, Berlin, Germany. katharina.schmidt-bleek@charite.de.
Berlin Institute of Health at Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin · DECharité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin · DEUniversity of Sydney · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNew tissue engineering strategies for bone regeneration need to be investigated in a relevant preclinical large animal model before making the translation into human patients. Therefore, our interdisciplinary group established a simplified large animal screening model for intramembranous bone defect regeneration in cancellous and cortical bone.

methodsRelated to a well-established model of cancellous drill hole defect regeneration in sheep, both the proximal and distal epimetaphyseal regions of the femur and the humerus were used bilaterally for eight drill hole cancellous defects (Ø 6 mm, 15 mm depth). Several improvements of the surgical procedure and equipment for an easier harvest of samples were invented. For the inclusion of cortical defect regeneration, a total of eight unicortical diaphyseal drill holes (6 mm Ø) were placed in the proximal-lateral and distal-medial parts of the metacarpal (MC) and metatarsal (MT) diaphyseal bone bilaterally. Acting moments within a normal gait cycle in the musculoskeletal lower limb model were compared with the results of the biomechanical in vitro torsion test until failure to ensure a low accidental fracture risk of utilized bones (ANOVA, p < 0.05). The model was tested in vivo, using thirteen adult, female, black-face sheep (Ø 66 kg; ± 5 kg; age ≥ 2.5 years). In a two-step surgical procedure 16 drill holes were performed for the investigation of two different time points within one animal. Defects were left empty, augmented with autologous cancellous bone or soft bone graft substitutes.

resultsThe in vitro tests confirmed this model a high comparability between drilled MC and MT bones and a high safety margin until fracture. The exclusion of one animal from the in vivo study, due to a spiral fracture of the left MC bone led to a tolerable failure rate of 8 %.

conclusionsAs a screening tool, promising biomaterials can be tested in this cancellous and cortical bone defect model prior to the application in a more complex treatment site.

Indexed as

Disease Models, AnimalAnimalsBone DiseasesBone RegenerationBone SubstitutesBone TransplantationFemaleFemurHumerusMetacarpal BonesMetatarsal BonesSheepTissue EngineeringBone Substitutes

Identifiers

PMID26932531
PMCPMC4774005
OpenAlexW2288212165

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.