Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28118552›Full record

ArticleJournal of dental research2017

Decellularized Tooth Bud Scaffolds for Tooth Regeneration.

W Zhang, B Vazquez, D Oreadi, P C Yelick

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of dental research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
5.7field-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

41 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 89 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Organoids in the oral and maxillofacial region: present and future.International journal of oral science · 2024
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Bioprinting and biomaterials for dental alveolar tissue regeneration.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2023
    Review
  19. Review
  20. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

W Zhang1 Division of Craniofacial and Molecular Genetics, Department of Orthodontics, Tufts University School of Dental Medicine, Boston, MA, USA.
B Vazquez1 Division of Craniofacial and Molecular Genetics, Department of Orthodontics, Tufts University School of Dental Medicine, Boston, MA, USA.
D Oreadi2 Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Tufts University School of Dental Medicine, Boston, MA, USA.
P C Yelick1 Division of Craniofacial and Molecular Genetics, Department of Orthodontics, Tufts University School of Dental Medicine, Boston, MA, USA.
Tufts University · US

Funding

Dental Stem Cells and Tooth Tissue EngineeringR01DE016132 · NIDCR · TUFTS UNIVERSITY BOSTON · PI YELICK, PAMELA C · 2005 to 2014
$5.5M
Bioengineered Composite Alveolar Bone-Tooth Constructs for Tooth RegenerationR01DE026731 · NIDCR · TUFTS UNIVERSITY BOSTON · PI YELICK, PAMELA C · 2017 to 2021
$3.6M
NIDCR NIH HHS R01 DE016132NIDCR NIH HHS R01 DE026731
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Whole tooth regeneration approaches currently are limited by our inability to bioengineer full-sized, living replacement teeth. Recently, decellularized organ scaffolds have shown promise for applications in regenerative medicine by providing a natural extracellular matrix environment that promotes cell attachment and tissue-specific differentiation leading to full-sized organ regeneration. We hypothesize that decellularized tooth buds (dTBs) created from unerupted porcine tooth buds (TBs) can be used to guide reseeded dental cell differentiation to form whole bioengineered teeth, thereby providing a potential off-the-shelf scaffold for whole tooth regeneration. Porcine TBs were harvested from discarded 6-mo-old pig jaws, and decellularized by successive sodium dodecyl sulfate/Triton-X cycles. Four types of replicate implants were used in this study: 1) acellular dTBs; 2) recellularized dTBs seeded with porcine dental epithelial cells, human dental pulp cells, and human umbilical vein endothelial cells (recell-dTBs); 3) dTBs seeded with bone morphogenetic protein (BMP)-2 (dTB-BMPs); and 4) freshly isolated nondecellularized natural TBs (nTBs). Replicate samples were implanted into the mandibles of host Yucatan mini-pigs and grown for 3 or 6 mo. Harvested mandibles with implanted TB constructs were fixed in formalin, decalcified, embedded in paraffin, sectioned, and analyzed via histological methods. Micro-computed tomography (CT) analysis was performed on harvested 6-mo samples prior to decalcification. All harvested constructs exhibited a high degree of cellularity. Significant production of organized dentin and enamel-like tissues was observed in dTB-recell and nTB implants, but not in dTB or dTB-BMP implants. Micro-CT analyses of 6-mo implants showed the formation of organized, bioengineered teeth of comparable size to natural teeth. To our knowledge, these results are the first to describe the potential use of dTBs for functional whole tooth regeneration.

Indexed as

BiomimeticsAnimalsBiomarkersBone Morphogenetic Protein 2Cell DifferentiationEpithelial CellsHumansImmunohistochemistryMandibleSwineSwine, MiniatureTissue EngineeringTissue ScaffoldsToothTooth GermBiomarkersBone Morphogenetic Protein 2biomimetic scaffoldsBMPdecellularizationextracellular matrixpostnatal dental stem cellsregenerative dentistry

Identifiers

PMID28118552
PMCPMC5453498
OpenAlexW2580122461

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.