Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30419181›Full record

ArticleThe American journal of sports medicine2018

Bone Marrow-Harvesting Technique Influences Functional Heterogeneity of Mesenchymal Stem/Stromal Cells and Cartilage Regeneration.

Kavitha Sivasubramaniyan, Dragos C Ilas, Abhishek Harichandan, Pieter K Bos, Diego L Santos, Peter de Zwart, Wendy J L M Koevoet, Heather Owston, Hans-Jörg Bühring, Elena Jones and 1 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The American journal of sports medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Endochondral Bone Regeneration by Non-autologous Mesenchymal Stem Cells.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2020
    Article
  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

11 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Kavitha SivasubramaniyanDepartment of Orthopaedics, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Dragos C IlasAcademic Unit of Musculoskeletal Diseases, Leeds Institute of Rheumatic and Musculoskeletal Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Abhishek HarichandanDepartment of Complex Tissue Regeneration, MERLN Institute for Technology Inspired Regenerative Medicine, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Pieter K BosDepartment of Orthopaedics, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Diego L SantosDepartment of Orthopaedics, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Peter de ZwartBG-Trauma-Center, Division of Arthroplasty, Department of Traumatology, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
Wendy J L M KoevoetDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Heather OwstonAcademic Unit of Musculoskeletal Diseases, Leeds Institute of Rheumatic and Musculoskeletal Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Hans-Jörg BühringDivision of Hematology, Immunology, Oncology and Rheumatology, Department of Internal Medicine II, University Clinic of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
Elena JonesAcademic Unit of Musculoskeletal Diseases, Leeds Institute of Rheumatic and Musculoskeletal Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Gerjo J V M van OschDepartment of Orthopaedics, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Erasmus MC · NLUniversity of Tübingen · DENIHR Leeds Musculoskeletal Biomedical Research Unit · GBUniversity of Leeds · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council MRC-MR-L022893
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundConnective tissue progenitors (CTPs) from native bone marrow (BM) or their culture-expanded progeny, often referred to as mesenchymal stem/stromal cells, represents a promising strategy for treatment of cartilage injuries. But the cartilage regeneration capacity of these cells remains unpredictable because of cell heterogeneity. HYPOTHESIS: The harvest technique of BM may highly influence stem cell heterogeneity and, thus, cartilage formation because these cells have distinct spatial localization within BM from the same bone. STUDY

designControlled laboratory study.

methodsCTPs obtained from the femur of patients undergoing total hip replacement by 2 harvest techniques-BM aspiration and BM collection-after bone rasping were immunophenotyped by flow cytometry and evaluated for chondrogenic ability. The spatial localization of different CTP subsets in BM was verified by immunohistochemistry.

resultsCells from the BM after rasping were significantly more chondrogenic than the donor-matched aspirate, whereas no notable difference in their osteogenic or adipogenic potential was observed. The authors then assessed whether distinct immunophenotypically defined CTP subsets were responsible for the different chondrogenic capacity. Cells directly isolated from BM after rasping contained a higher percentage (mean, 7.2-fold) of CD45-CD271+CD56+ CTPs as compared with BM aspirates. The presence of this subset in the harvested BM strongly correlated with chondrogenic ability, showing that CD271+CD56+ cells are enriched in chondroprogenitors. Furthermore, evaluation of these CTP subsets in BM revealed that CD271+CD56+ cells were localized in the bone-lining regions whereas CD271+CD56- cells were found in the perivascular regions. Since the iliac crest remains a frequent site of BM harvest for musculoskeletal regeneration, the authors also compared the spatial distribution of these subsets in trabeculae of femoral head and iliac crest and found CD271+CD56+ bone-lining cells in both tissues.

conclusionChondrogenically distinct CTP subsets have distinct spatial localization in BM; hence, the harvest technique of BM determines the efficiency of cartilage formation. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The harvest technique of BM may be of major importance in determining the clinical success of BM mesenchymal stem/stromal cells in cartilage repair.

Indexed as

AgedAged, 80 and overBone MarrowBone Marrow CellsBone Marrow TransplantationCartilageCartilage DiseasesCell CountCell DifferentiationChondrogenesisFemaleFlow CytometryHumansIliumLeukocyte Common AntigensMaleLeukocyte Common AntigensNerve Tissue ProteinsNGFR protein, humanPTPRC protein, humanReceptors, Nerve Growth Factorcartilage injuriescell therapychondrogenic abilitystem cell heterogeneity

Identifiers

PMID30419181
PMCPMC6282158
OpenAlexW2901307368

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.