SynthesisInternational journal of molecular sciences2019
Are the Biological and Biomechanical Properties of Meniscal Scaffolds Reflected in Clinical Practice? A Systematic Review of the Literature.
Synthesis in International journal of molecular sciences, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Integrated strategies in meniscus tissue engineering: from biomaterials to stem cell-driven regeneration.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Review
- Bioassembly of Region-Specific Fibrocartilage Microtissues to Engineer Zonally Defined Meniscal Grafts.Advanced healthcare materials · 2025Article
- Predictors of Postoperative Outcomes after Arthroscopic Partial Meniscectomy: A Retrospective Analysis.Orthopaedic surgery · 2024Article
- Addressing meniscal deficiency part 2: An umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses on meniscal scaffold-based approaches.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2024Review
- Functional meniscus reconstruction with biological and biomechanical heterogeneities through topological self-induction of stem cells.Bioactive materials · 2024Article
- Cyclic compressive loading induces a mature meniscal cell phenotype in mesenchymal stem cells with an atelocollagen-based scaffold.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2024Article
- An Up-to-Date Review of the Meniscus Literature: A Systematic Summary of Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this PRISMA review was to assess whether the CMI and Actifit scaffolds, when used in clinical practice, improve clinical outcomes and demonstrate the ideal biological and biomechanical properties of scaffolds: being chondroprotective, porous, resorbable, able to mature and promote regeneration of tissue. This was done by only including studies that assessed clinical outcome and used a scale to assess both integrity of the scaffold and its effects on articular cartilage via MRI. A search was performed on PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus and clinicaltrials.gov. 2457 articles were screened, from which eight studies were selected: four used Actifit, three used CMI and one compared the two. All studies reported significant improvement in at least one clinical outcome compared to baseline. Some studies suggested that the scaffolds appeared to show porosity, mature, resorb and/or have possible chondroprotective effects, as assessed by MRI. The evidence for clinical translation is limited by differences in study methodology and small sample sizes, but is promising in terms of improving clinical outcomes in the short to mid-term. Higher level evidence, with MRI and histological evaluation of the scaffold and articular cartilage, is now needed to further determine whether these scaffolds exhibit these useful properties.
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.