Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30840687›Full record

ArticlePloS one2019

Methods of olfactory ensheathing cell harvesting from the olfactory mucosa in dogs.

Daisuke Ito, Darren Carwardine, Jon Prager, Liang Fong Wong, Masato Kitagawa, Nick Jeffery, Nicolas Granger

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 44% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Daisuke ItoDivision of Regenerative Medicine, School of Clinical Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-3671-1889
Darren CarwardineDivision of Regenerative Medicine, School of Clinical Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-5207-6619
Jon PragerDivision of Regenerative Medicine, School of Clinical Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.
Liang Fong WongDivision of Regenerative Medicine, School of Clinical Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.
Masato KitagawaDivision of Veterinary Neurology, School of Veterinary Medicine, Nihon University, Fujisawa, Kanagawa, Japan.
Nick JefferyDepartment of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, United States of America.
Nicolas GrangerThe Royal Veterinary College, University of London, Hawkshead Lane, Hatfield, Hertfordshire, United Kingdom & CVS referrals, Bristol Veterinary Specialists at Highcroft, Bristol, United Kingdom.
University of Bristol · GBNihon University · JPRoyal Veterinary College · GBTexas A&M University · US

Funding

Medical Research Council G0700392
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Olfactory ensheathing cells are thought to support regeneration and remyelination of damaged axons when transplanted into spinal cord injuries. Following transplantation, improved locomotion has been detected in many laboratory models and in dogs with naturally-occurring spinal cord injury; safety trials in humans have also been completed. For widespread clinical implementation, it will be necessary to derive large numbers of these cells from an accessible and, preferably, autologous, source making olfactory mucosa a good candidate. Here, we compared the yield of olfactory ensheathing cells from the olfactory mucosa using 3 different techniques: rhinotomy, frontal sinus keyhole approach and rhinoscopy. From canine clinical cases with spinal cord injury, 27 biopsies were obtained by rhinotomy, 7 by a keyhole approach and 1 with rhinoscopy. Biopsy via rhinoscopy was also tested in 13 cadavers and 7 living normal dogs. After 21 days of cell culture, the proportions and populations of p75-positive (presumed to be olfactory ensheathing) cells obtained by the keyhole approach and rhinoscopy were similar (~4.5 x 106 p75-positive cells; ~70% of the total cell population), but fewer were obtained by frontal sinus rhinotomy. Cerebrospinal fluid rhinorrhea was observed in one dog and emphysema in 3 dogs following rhinotomy. Blepharitis occurred in one dog after the keyhole approach. All three biopsy methods appear to be safe for harvesting a suitable number of olfactory ensheathing cells from the olfactory mucosa for transplantation within the spinal cord but each technique has specific advantages and drawbacks.

Indexed as

Nerve RegenerationRecovery of FunctionAnimalsCells, CulturedCell TransplantationDogsLocomotionOlfactory MucosaSpinal Cord Injuries

Identifiers

PMID30840687
PMCPMC6402693
OpenAlexW2921664954

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.