Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28207637›Full record

ArticleTransplantation2017

The Efficacy of a Prevascularized, Retrievable Poly(D,L,-lactide-co-ε-caprolactone) Subcutaneous Scaffold as Transplantation Site for Pancreatic Islets.

Alexandra M Smink, Shiri Li, Don T Hertsig, Bart J de Haan, Leendert Schwab, Aart A van Apeldoorn, Eelco de Koning, Marijke M Faas, Jonathan R T Lakey, Paul de Vos

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Transplantation, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

31 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Clinical Translation of Bio-Artificial Pancreas Therapies: Ethical, Legal and Psychosocial Interdisciplinary Considerations and Key Recommendations.Transplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation · 2023
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  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

10 authors.

Alexandra M Smink1 Department of Pathology and Medical Biology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands. 2 Department of Surgery, University of California Irvine, Orange, CA. 3 Polyganics, Groningen, The Netherlands. 4 Department of Pathology and Medical Biology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands. 5 Department of Developmental BioEngineering, Faculty of Science and Technology, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands. 6 Department of Nephrology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands. 7 Department of Pathology and Medical Biology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands. 8 Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands. 9 Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of California Irvine, Irvine, CA. 10 Department of Surgery, University of California Irvine, Orange, CA. 11 Department of Pathology and Medical Biology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Shiri Li
Don T Hertsig
Bart J de Haan
Leendert Schwab
Aart A van Apeldoorn
Eelco de Koning
Marijke M Faas
Jonathan R T Lakey
Paul de Vos

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe liver as transplantation site for human pancreatic islets is a harsh microenvironment for islets and it lacks the ability to retrieve the graft. A retrievable, extrahepatic transplantation site that mimics the pancreatic environment is desired. Ideally, this transplantation site should be located subdermal for easy surgical-access but this never resulted in normoglycemia. Here, we describe the design and efficacy of a novel prevascularized, subcutaneously implanted, retrievable poly (D,L-lactide-co-ε-caprolactone) scaffold.

methodThree dosages of rat islets, that is, 400, 800, and 1200, were implanted in immune compromised mice to test the efficacy (n = 5). Islet transplantation under the kidney capsule served as control (n = 5). The efficacy was determined by nonfasting blood glucose measurements and glucose tolerance tests.

resultsTransplantation of 800 (n = 5) and 1200 islets (n = 5) into the scaffold reversed diabetes in respectively 80 and 100% of the mice within 6.8 to 18.5 days posttransplant. The marginal dose of 400 islets (n = 5) induced normoglycemia in 20%. The glucose tolerance test showed major improvement of the glucose clearance in the scaffold groups compared to diabetic controls. However, the kidney capsule was slightly more efficacious because all 800 (n = 5) and 1200 islets (n = 5) recipients and 40% of the 400 islets (n = 5) recipients became normoglycemic within 8 days. Removal of the scaffolds or kidney grafts resulted in immediate return to hyperglycemia. Normoglycemia was not achieved with 1200 islets in the unmodified skin group.

conclusionsOur findings demonstrate that the prevascularized poly (D,L-lactide-co-ε-caprolactone) scaffold maintains viability and function of islets in the subcutaneous site.

Indexed as

Tissue ScaffoldsAnimalsBiomarkersBlood GlucoseDiabetes Mellitus, ExperimentalDisease Models, AnimalGlucose Tolerance TestIslets of LangerhansIslets of Langerhans TransplantationMaleMice, NudePolyestersRats, Sprague-DawleySubcutaneous TissueTime FactorsTissue EngineeringBiomarkersBlood Glucoselactide-caprolactone copolymerPolyesters

Identifiers

PMID28207637
PMCPMC7228571

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.