ArticleAmerican journal of transplantation : official journal of the American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons2018
The bridge between transplantation and regenerative medicine: Beginning a new Banff classification of tissue engineering pathology.
Article in American journal of transplantation : official journal of the American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Transitioning of renal transplant pathology from allograft to xenograft and tissue engineering pathology: Are we prepared?World journal of transplantation · 2023Review
- Diagnosis of renal transplant rejection: Banff classification and beyond.Kidney research and clinical practice · 2020Review
- Enhancing the Value of Histopathological Assessment of Allograft Biopsy Monitoring.Transplantation · 2019Review
- A 2018 Reference Guide to the Banff Classification of Renal Allograft Pathology.Transplantation · 2018Review
- The bridge between transplantation and regenerative medicine: Beginning a new Banff classification of tissue engineering pathology.American journal of transplantation : official journal of the American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
10 authors at 8 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The science of regenerative medicine is arguably older than transplantation-the first major textbook was published in 1901-and a major regenerative medicine meeting took place in 1988, three years before the first Banff transplant pathology meeting. However, the subject of regenerative medicine/tissue engineering pathology has never received focused attention. Defining and classifying tissue engineering pathology is long overdue. In the next decades, the field of transplantation will enlarge at least tenfold, through a hybrid of tissue engineering combined with existing approaches to lessening the organ shortage. Gradually, transplantation pathologists will become tissue-(re-) engineering pathologists with enhanced skill sets to address concerns involving the use of bioengineered organs. We outline ways of categorizing abnormalities in tissue-engineered organs through traditional light microscopy or other modalities including biomarkers. We propose creating a new Banff classification of tissue engineering pathology to standardize and assess de novo bioengineered solid organs transplantable success in vivo. We recommend constructing a framework for a classification of tissue engineering pathology now with interdisciplinary consensus discussions to further develop and finalize the classification at future Banff Transplant Pathology meetings, in collaboration with the human cell atlas project. A possible nosology of pathologic abnormalities in tissue-engineered organs is suggested.
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.