Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29387727›Full record

ArticleBioMed research international2017

Decellularized Swine Dental Pulp as a Bioscaffold for Pulp Regeneration.

Lei Hu, Zhenhua Gao, Junji Xu, Zhao Zhu, Zhipeng Fan, Chunmei Zhang, Jinsong Wang, Songlin Wang

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BioMed research international, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
5.0field-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

33 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 80 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. In vitro, ex vivo, and in vivo models for dental pulp regeneration.Journal of materials science. Materials in medicine · 2023
    Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. The Progress of Decellularized Scaffold in Stomatology.Tissue engineering and regenerative medicine · 2022
    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

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Lei HuMolecular Laboratory for Gene Therapy and Tooth Regeneration, Beijing Key Laboratory of Tooth Regeneration and Function Reconstruction, School of Stomatology, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100050, China.
Zhenhua GaoMolecular Laboratory for Gene Therapy and Tooth Regeneration, Beijing Key Laboratory of Tooth Regeneration and Function Reconstruction, School of Stomatology, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100050, China.
Junji XuMolecular Laboratory for Gene Therapy and Tooth Regeneration, Beijing Key Laboratory of Tooth Regeneration and Function Reconstruction, School of Stomatology, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100050, China.ORCID 0000-0003-1057-8976
Zhao ZhuMolecular Laboratory for Gene Therapy and Tooth Regeneration, Beijing Key Laboratory of Tooth Regeneration and Function Reconstruction, School of Stomatology, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100050, China.
Zhipeng FanLaboratory of Molecular Signaling and Stem Cells Therapy, Beijing Key Laboratory of Tooth Regeneration and Function Reconstruction, School of Stomatology, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100050, China.ORCID 0000-0003-0629-3476
Chunmei ZhangMolecular Laboratory for Gene Therapy and Tooth Regeneration, Beijing Key Laboratory of Tooth Regeneration and Function Reconstruction, School of Stomatology, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100050, China.
Jinsong WangMolecular Laboratory for Gene Therapy and Tooth Regeneration, Beijing Key Laboratory of Tooth Regeneration and Function Reconstruction, School of Stomatology, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100050, China.
Songlin WangMolecular Laboratory for Gene Therapy and Tooth Regeneration, Beijing Key Laboratory of Tooth Regeneration and Function Reconstruction, School of Stomatology, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100050, China.ORCID 0000-0002-7435-2637
Capital Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Endodontic regeneration shows promise in treating dental pulp diseases; however, no suitable scaffolds exist for pulp regeneration. Acellular natural extracellular matrix (ECM) is a favorable scaffold for tissue regeneration since the anatomical structure and ECM of the natural tissues or organs are well-preserved. Xenogeneic ECM is superior to autologous or allogeneic ECM in tissue engineering for its unlimited resources. This study investigated the characteristics of decellularized dental pulp ECM from swine and evaluated whether it could mediate pulp regeneration. Dental pulps were acquired from the mandible anterior teeth of swine 12 months of age and decellularized with 10% sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) combined with Triton X-100. Pulp regeneration was conducted by seeding human dental pulp stem cells into decellularized pulp and transplanted subcutaneously into nude mice for 8 weeks. The decellularized pulp demonstrated preserved natural shape and structure without any cellular components. Histological analysis showed excellent ECM preservation and pulp-like tissue, and newly formed mineralized tissues were regenerated after being transplanted in vivo. In conclusion, decellularized swine dental pulp maintains ECM components favoring stem cell proliferation and differentiation, thus representing a suitable scaffold for improving clinical outcomes and functions of teeth with dental pulp diseases.

Indexed as

Bone RegenerationCalcification, PhysiologicAnimalsDental PulpExtracellular MatrixHumansStem CellsSwineTissue Scaffolds

Identifiers

PMID29387727
PMCPMC5745671
OpenAlexW2772842214

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.