Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32385730›Full record

ArticleJournal of experimental orthopaedics2020

CARGEL Bioscaffold improves cartilage repair tissue after bone marrow stimulation in a minipig model.

K Hede, B B Christensen, M L Olesen, J S Thomsen, C B Foldager, M C Lind

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of experimental orthopaedics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

K HedeOrthopedic Research Laboratory, Aarhus University Hospital, Palle Juul-Jensens Boulevard 99, Section J, Level 1, 8200, Aarhus N, Denmark. kch@clin.au.dk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3309-5320
B B ChristensenOrthopedic Research Laboratory, Aarhus University Hospital, Palle Juul-Jensens Boulevard 99, Section J, Level 1, 8200, Aarhus N, Denmark.
M L OlesenOrthopedic Research Laboratory, Aarhus University Hospital, Palle Juul-Jensens Boulevard 99, Section J, Level 1, 8200, Aarhus N, Denmark.
J S ThomsenDepartment of Biomedicine, Aarhus University, Wilhelm Meyers Allé 3, 8000, Aarhus C, Denmark.
C B FoldagerOrthopedic Research Laboratory, Aarhus University Hospital, Palle Juul-Jensens Boulevard 99, Section J, Level 1, 8200, Aarhus N, Denmark.
M C LindOrthopedic Research Laboratory, Aarhus University Hospital, Palle Juul-Jensens Boulevard 99, Section J, Level 1, 8200, Aarhus N, Denmark.
Aarhus University Hospital · DKAarhus University · DK

Funding

Direktør Emil C. Hertz og Hustru Inger Hertz Fond KJR-13016Gigtforeningen R160-A5152
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo gain knowledge of the repair tissue in critically sized cartilage defects using bone marrow stimulation combined with CARGEL Bioscaffold (CB) compared with bone marrow stimulation (BMS) alone in a validated animal model.

methodsSix adult Göttingen minipigs received two chondral defects in each knee. The knees were randomized to either BMS combined with CB or BMS alone. The animals were euthanized after 6 months. Follow-up consisted of histomorphometry, immunohistochemistry, semiquantitative scoring of the repair tissue (ICRS II), and μCT of the trabecular bone beneath the defect.

resultsThere was significantly more fibrocartilage (80% vs 64%, p = 0.04) and a trend towards less fibrous tissue (15% vs 30%, p = 0.05) in the defects treated with CB. Hyaline cartilage was only seen in one defect treated with CB and none treated with BMS alone. For histological semiquantitative score (ICRS II), defects treated with CB scored lower on subchondral bone (69 vs. 44, p = 0.04). No significant differences were seen on the other parameters of the ICRS II. Immunohistochemistry revealed a trend towards more positive staining for collagen type II in the CB group (p = 0.08). μCT demonstrated thicker trabeculae (p = 0.029) and a higher bone material density (p = 0.028) in defects treated with CB.

conclusionTreatment of cartilage injuries with CARGEL Bioscaffold seems to lead to an improved repair tissue and a more pronounced subchondral bone response compared with bone marrow stimulation alone. However, the CARGEL Bioscaffold treatment did not lead to formation of hyaline cartilage.

Indexed as

Articular cartilageBone marrow stimulationCartilage repairDrillingKneeMicrofractureMinipig

Identifiers

PMID32385730
PMCPMC7210369
OpenAlexW3022177835

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.