Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27239485›Full record

ArticleGenes & diseases2016

Stem cells, growth factors and scaffolds in craniofacial regenerative medicine.

Viktor Tollemar, Zach J Collier, Maryam K Mohammed, Michael J Lee, Guillermo A Ameer, Russell R Reid

Open access · diamondAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Genes & diseases, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 45 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
45citing papers in PubMed
5.3field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

45 citing papers in PubMed, 129 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Viktor TollemarThe University of Chicago Pritzker School of Medicine, Chicago, IL 60637, USA; Department of Orthopedic Surgery and Rehabilitation Medicine, The University of Chicago Medical Center, Chicago, IL 60637, USA; Laboratory of Craniofacial Biology and Development, Section of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, The University of Chicago Medicine, Chicago, IL 60637, USA.
Zach J CollierThe University of Chicago Pritzker School of Medicine, Chicago, IL 60637, USA; Department of Orthopedic Surgery and Rehabilitation Medicine, The University of Chicago Medical Center, Chicago, IL 60637, USA.
Maryam K MohammedThe University of Chicago Pritzker School of Medicine, Chicago, IL 60637, USA; Department of Orthopedic Surgery and Rehabilitation Medicine, The University of Chicago Medical Center, Chicago, IL 60637, USA.
Michael J LeeDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery and Rehabilitation Medicine, The University of Chicago Medical Center, Chicago, IL 60637, USA.
Guillermo A AmeerDepartment of Surgery, Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL 60611, USA; Biomedical Engineering Department, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL 60208.
Russell R ReidLaboratory of Craniofacial Biology and Development, Section of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, The University of Chicago Medicine, Chicago, IL 60637, USA.
University of Chicago · USUniversity of Chicago Medical Center · USNorthwestern University · US

Funding

Differential Effects of BMPs on the Healing of Craniofacial DefectsK08DE020140 · NIDCR · UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO · PI REID, RUSSELL R. · 2009 to 2013
$624k
NIDCR NIH HHS K08 DE020140
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Current reconstructive approaches to large craniofacial skeletal defects are often complicated and challenging. Critical-sized defects are unable to heal via natural regenerative processes and require surgical intervention, traditionally involving autologous bone (mainly in the form of nonvascularized grafts) or alloplasts. Autologous bone grafts remain the gold standard of care in spite of the associated risk of donor site morbidity. Tissue engineering approaches represent a promising alternative that would serve to facilitate bone regeneration even in large craniofacial skeletal defects. This strategy has been tested in a myriad of iterations by utilizing a variety of osteoconductive scaffold materials, osteoblastic stem cells, as well as osteoinductive growth factors and small molecules. One of the major challenges facing tissue engineers is creating a scaffold fulfilling the properties necessary for controlled bone regeneration. These properties include osteoconduction, osetoinduction, biocompatibility, biodegradability, vascularization, and progenitor cell retention. This review will provide an overview of how optimization of the aforementioned scaffold parameters facilitates bone regenerative capabilities as well as a discussion of common osteoconductive scaffold materials.

Indexed as

bone regenerationcraniofacial defectsosteogenesisregenerative medicineScaffoldstissue engineering

Identifiers

PMID27239485
PMCPMC4880030
OpenAlexW1909934830

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.