Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32820463›Full record

ArticleCytotechnology2020

Comparing bone tissue engineering efficacy of HDPSCs, HBMSCs on 3D biomimetic ABM-P-15 scaffolds in vitro and in vivo.

Yamuna Mohanram, Jingying Zhang, Eleftherios Tsiridis, Xuebin B Yang

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cytotechnology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 81 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Dental pulp stem cells for reconstructing bone defects: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of dental research, dental clinics, dental prospects · 2022
    Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.

Yamuna MohanramBiomaterials & Tissue Engineering Group, Department of Oral Biology, School of Dentistry, University of Leeds, Level 7, Wellcome Trust Brenner Building, St. James's University Hospital, Leeds, LS9 7TF, UK.
Jingying ZhangBiomaterials & Tissue Engineering Group, Department of Oral Biology, School of Dentistry, University of Leeds, Level 7, Wellcome Trust Brenner Building, St. James's University Hospital, Leeds, LS9 7TF, UK.
Eleftherios TsiridisAcademic Orthopaedic Department, Aristotle University Medical School, 54124, Thessaloniki, Greece.
Xuebin B YangBiomaterials & Tissue Engineering Group, Department of Oral Biology, School of Dentistry, University of Leeds, Level 7, Wellcome Trust Brenner Building, St. James's University Hospital, Leeds, LS9 7TF, UK. X.B.Yang@leeds.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0144-2826
University of Leeds · GBAristotle University of Thessaloniki · GR

Funding

Changzhou Science and Technology Bureau 102178Guangdong Medical University 4SG19002GGuangdong Medical University 4SG19044GGuangdong Medical University 4SG19057GGuangdong Medical University 4SG19214GGuangdong Medical University G619080438National Natural Science Foundation of China 81500890
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Human bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells (HBMSCs) has been the gold standard for bone regeneration. However, the low proliferation rate and long doubling time limited its clinical applications. This study aims to compare the bone tissue engineering efficacy of human dental pulp stem cells (HDPSCs) with HBMSCs in 2D, and 3D anorganic bone mineral (ABM) coated with a biomimetic collagen peptide (ABM-P-15) for improving bone-forming speed and efficacy in vitro and in vivo. The multipotential of both HDPSCs and HBMSCs have been compared in vitro. The bone formation of HDPSCs on ABM-P-15 was tested using in vivo model. The osteogenic potential of the cells was confirmed by alkaline phosphatase (ALP) and immunohistological staining for osteogenic markers. Enhanced ALP, collagen, lipid droplet, or glycosaminoglycans production were visible in HDPSCs and HBMSCs after osteogenic, adipogenic and chondrogenic induction. HDPSC showed stronger ALP staining compared to HBMSCs. Confocal images showed more viable HDPSCs on both ABM-P-15 and ABM scaffolds compared to HBMSCs on similar scaffolds. ABM-P-15 enhanced cell attachment/spreading/bridging formation on ABM-P-15 scaffolds and significantly increased quantitative ALP specific activities of the HDPSCs and HBMSCs. After 8 weeks in vivo implantation in diffusion chamber model, the HDPSCs on ABM-P-15 scaffolds showed extensive high organised collagenous matrix formation that was positive for COL-I and OCN compared to ABM alone. In conclusion, the HDPSCs have a higher proliferation rate and better osteogenic capacity, which indicated the potential of combining HDPSCs with ABM-P-15 scaffolds for improving bone regeneration speed and efficacy.

Indexed as

Bone tissue engineeringHBMSCsHDPSCsIn vivoPepGen P-15

Identifiers

PMID32820463
PMCPMC7548016
OpenAlexW3080918222

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.