Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29177132›Full record

ReviewCurrent stem cell reports2017

Autologous Cell Seeding in Tracheal Tissue Engineering.

Elizabeth F Maughan, Robert E Hynds, Toby J Proctor, Sam M Janes, Martin Elliott, Martin A Birchall, Mark W Lowdell, Paolo De Coppi

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current stem cell reports, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing 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

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. A 28-Year-Old Man with Stridor and Dyspnea.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Tracheal Tissue Engineering: Principles and State of the Art.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Management of Tracheal Diseases in Children.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2020
    Review
  16. Factors Influencing Poor Outcomes in Synthetic Tissue-Engineered Tracheal Replacement.Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery · 2019
    Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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

8 authors.

Elizabeth F MaughanLungs for Living Research Centre, UCL Respiratory, University College London, London, UK.
Robert E HyndsLungs for Living Research Centre, UCL Respiratory, University College London, London, UK.
Toby J ProctorCentre for Cell, Gene and Tissue Therapies, Royal Free Hospital & University College London, London, UK.
Sam M JanesLungs for Living Research Centre, UCL Respiratory, University College London, London, UK.
Martin ElliottGreat Ormond Street Hospital, London, UK.
Martin A BirchallUCL Centre for Regenerative Medicine, University College London, London, UK.
Mark W LowdellCentre for Cell, Gene and Tissue Therapies, Royal Free Hospital & University College London, London, UK.
Paolo De CoppiStem Cell and Regenerative Medicine Section, UCL Institute of Child Health and Great Ormond Street Hospital, 30 Guilford Street, London, WC1N 1EH UK.

Funding

Department of Health RP_2014-04-046Medical Research Council G1001539Medical Research Council MR/K026453/1Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewThere is no consensus on the best technology to be employed for tracheal replacement. One particularly promising approach is based upon tissue engineering and involves applying autologous cells to transplantable scaffolds. Here, we present the reported pre-clinical and clinical data exploring the various options for achieving such seeding. RECENT

findingsVarious cell combinations, delivery strategies, and outcome measures are described. Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) are the most widely employed cell type in tracheal bioengineering. Airway epithelial cell luminal seeding is also widely employed, alone or in combination with other cell types. Combinations have thus far shown the greatest promise. Chondrocytes may improve mechanical outcomes in pre-clinical models, but have not been clinically tested. Rapid or pre-vascularization of scaffolds is an important consideration. Overall, there are few published objective measures of post-seeding cell viability, survival, or overall efficacy. SUMMARY: There is no clear consensus on the optimal cell-scaffold combination and mechanisms for seeding

Indexed as

Autologous cell seedingClinical translationPre-clinical modelsTissue engineeringTrachea

Identifiers

PMID29177132
PMCPMC5683058

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.