Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32245268›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of molecular sciences2020

Biofabrication of SDF-1 Functionalized 3D-Printed Cell-Free Scaffolds for Bone Tissue Regeneration.

Alina Lauer, Philipp Wolf, Dorothea Mehler, Hermann Götz, Mehmet Rüzgar, Andreas Baranowski, Dirk Henrich, Pol Maria Rommens, Ulrike Ritz

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of molecular sciences, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 24% 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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. 3D Bioprinting in Limb Salvage Surgery.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2024
    Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  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

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Alina LauerDepartment of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, BiomaTiCS, University Medical Center, Johannes Gutenberg University, 55131 Mainz, Germany.
Philipp WolfDepartment of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, BiomaTiCS, University Medical Center, Johannes Gutenberg University, 55131 Mainz, Germany.
Dorothea MehlerDepartment of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, BiomaTiCS, University Medical Center, Johannes Gutenberg University, 55131 Mainz, Germany.
Hermann GötzCBU-Cell Biology Unit, PKZI, University Medical Center, BiomaTiCS, Johannes Gutenberg University, 55131 Mainz, Germany.
Mehmet RüzgarDepartment of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, BiomaTiCS, University Medical Center, Johannes Gutenberg University, 55131 Mainz, Germany.
Andreas BaranowskiDepartment of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, BiomaTiCS, University Medical Center, Johannes Gutenberg University, 55131 Mainz, Germany.
Dirk HenrichDepartment of Trauma, Hand and Reconstructive Surgery, Goethe University Frankfurt, 60590 Frankfurt am Main, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-9728-4032
Pol Maria RommensDepartment of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, BiomaTiCS, University Medical Center, Johannes Gutenberg University, 55131 Mainz, Germany.
Ulrike RitzDepartment of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, BiomaTiCS, University Medical Center, Johannes Gutenberg University, 55131 Mainz, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-8936-3227
Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz · DEGoethe University Frankfurt · DE

Funding

Biomatics Biomatics
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Large segmental bone defects occurring after trauma, bone tumors, infections or revision surgeries are a challenge for surgeons. The aim of our study was to develop a new biomaterial utilizing simple and cheap 3D-printing techniques. A porous polylactide (PLA) cylinder was printed and functionalized with stromal-derived factor 1 (SDF-1) or bone morphogenetic protein 7 (BMP-7) immobilized in collagen type I. Biomechanical testing proved biomechanical stability and the scaffolds were implanted into a 6 mm critical size defect in rat femur. Bone growth was observed via x-ray and after 8 weeks, bone regeneration was analyzed with µCT and histological staining methods. Development of non-unions was detected in the control group with no implant. Implantation of PLA cylinder alone resulted in a slight but not significant osteoconductive effect, which was more pronounced in the group where the PLA cylinder was loaded with collagen type I. Addition of SDF-1 resulted in an osteoinductive effect, with stronger new bone formation. BMP-7 treatment showed the most distinct effect on bone regeneration. However, histological analyses revealed that newly formed bone in the BMP-7 group displayed a holey structure. Our results confirm the osteoinductive character of this 3D-biofabricated cell-free new biomaterial and raise new options for its application in bone tissue regeneration.

Indexed as

AnimalsBiocompatible MaterialsBone Morphogenetic Protein 7Bone RegenerationChemokine CXCL12Collagen Type IFemurMaterials TestingOsteogenesisPolyestersPorosityPrinting, Three-DimensionalRatsRats, WistarTissue ScaffoldsWound HealingBiocompatible MaterialsBone Morphogenetic Protein 7Chemokine CXCL12Collagen Type ICXCL12 protein, humanPolyesterspoly(lactide)3D printed cell-free scaffoldbone tissue regenerationcollagen type Iin vivo model of critical size defectspolylactidestromal-derived factor 1

Identifiers

PMID32245268
PMCPMC7139557
OpenAlexW3011876123

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.