ArticlePeerJ2017
Augmented cartilage regeneration by implantation of cellular versus acellular implants after bone marrow stimulation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of animal studies.
Article in PeerJ, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Models of cartilage repair with autologous mesenchymal stem cells seeded on scaffolds: a systematic narrative review.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Review
- Therapeutic effects and adaptive limits of an acellular technique by ultrapurified alginate (UPAL) gel implantation in canine osteochondral defect models.Regenerative therapy · 2020Article
- Autologous stem cell-derived chondrocyte implantation with bio-targeted microspheres for the treatment of osteochondral defects.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2019Article
- Dynamic Compressive Loading Improves Cartilage Repair in an In Vitro Model of Microfracture: Comparison of 2 Mechanical Loading Regimens on Simulated Microfracture Based on Fibrin Gel Scaffolds Encapsulating Connective Tissue Progenitor Cells.The American journal of sports medicine · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Bone marrow stimulation may be applied to regenerate focal cartilage defects, but generally results in transient clinical improvement and formation of fibrocartilage rather than hyaline cartilage. Tissue engineering and regenerative medicine strive to develop new solutions to regenerate hyaline cartilage tissue. This systematic review and meta-analysis provides a comprehensive overview of current literature and assesses the efficacy of articular cartilage regeneration by implantation of cell-laden versus cell-free biomaterials in the knee and ankle joint in animals after bone marrow stimulation. PubMed and EMBASE (via OvidSP) were systematically searched using tissue engineering, cartilage and animals search strategies. Included were primary studies in which cellular and acellular biomaterials were implanted after applying bone marrow stimulation in the knee or ankle joint in healthy animals. Study characteristics were tabulated and outcome data were collected for meta-analysis for studies applying semi-quantitative histology as outcome measure (117 studies). Cartilage regeneration was expressed on an absolute 0-100% scale and random effects meta-analyses were performed. Implantation of cellular biomaterials significantly improved cartilage regeneration by 18.6% compared to acellular biomaterials. No significant differences were found between biomaterials loaded with stem cells and those loaded with somatic cells. Culture conditions of cells did not affect cartilage regeneration. Cartilage formation was reduced with adipose-derived stem cells compared to other cell types, but still improved compared to acellular scaffolds. Assessment of the risk of bias was impaired due to incomplete reporting for most studies. Implantation of cellular biomaterials improves cartilage regeneration compared to acellular biomaterials.
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.