Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31194079›Full record

ReviewJournal of orthopaedic translation2019

Bioactive scaffolds for osteochondral regeneration.

Cuijun Deng, Jiang Chang, Chengtie Wu

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of orthopaedic translation, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 65 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
65citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

65 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Application and prospects of nanomaterials in osteoporosis treatment.International journal of pharmaceutics: X · 2026
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. A bioactive supramolecular and covalent polymer scaffold for cartilage repair in a sheep model.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024
    Article

5 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

3 authors.

Cuijun DengState Key Laboratory of High Performance Ceramics and Superfine Microstructure, Biomaterials and Tissue Engineering Research Center, Shanghai Institute of Ceramics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shanghai 200050, PR China.
Jiang ChangState Key Laboratory of High Performance Ceramics and Superfine Microstructure, Biomaterials and Tissue Engineering Research Center, Shanghai Institute of Ceramics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shanghai 200050, PR China.
Chengtie WuState Key Laboratory of High Performance Ceramics and Superfine Microstructure, Biomaterials and Tissue Engineering Research Center, Shanghai Institute of Ceramics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shanghai 200050, PR China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Treatment for osteochondral defects remains a great challenge. Although several clinical strategies have been developed for management of osteochondral defects, the reconstruction of both cartilage and subchondral bone has proved to be difficult due to their different physiological structures and functions. Considering the restriction of cartilage to self-healing and the different biological properties in osteochondral tissue, new therapy strategies are essential to be developed. This review will focus on the latest developments of bioactive scaffolds, which facilitate the osteogenic and chondrogenic differentiation for the regeneration of bone and cartilage. Besides, the topic will also review the basic anatomy, strategies and challenges for osteochondral reconstruction, the selection of cells, biochemical factors and bioactive materials, as well as the design and preparation of bioactive scaffolds. Specifically, we summarize the most recent developments of single-type bioactive scaffolds for simultaneously regenerating cartilage and subchondral bone. Moreover, the future outlook of bioactive scaffolds in osteochondral tissue engineering will be discussed. This review offers a comprehensive summary of the most recent trend in osteochondral defect reconstruction, paving the way for the bioactive scaffolds in clinical therapy. THE TRANSLATIONAL POTENTIAL OF THIS ARTICLE: This review summaries the latest developments of single-type bioactive scaffolds for regeneration of osteochondral defects. We also highlight a new possible translational direction for cartilage formation by harnessing bioactive ions and propose novel paradigms for subchondral bone regeneration in application of bioceramic scaffolds.

Indexed as

Bioactive scaffoldsBioceramicsCartilage repairOsteochondral regenerationSubchondral bone regeneration

Identifiers

PMID31194079
PMCPMC6551354

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.