ArticleBone2021
A new approach to analyzing regenerated bone quality in the mouse digit amputation model using semi-automatic processing of microCT data.
Article in Bone, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Oxaloacetate enhances and accelerates regeneration in young mice by promoting proliferation and mineralization.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2023Article
- Evaluating differences in Young's Modulus of regenerated and uninjured mouse digit bone through microCT density-based calculation and nanoindentation testing.Journal of biomechanics · 2022Article
- Spatial transcriptomics reveals metabolic changes underly age-dependent declines in digit regeneration.eLife · 2022Article
- Mammalian Digit Tip Regeneration: Moving from Phenomenon to Molecular Mechanism.Cold Spring Harbor perspectives in biology · 2022Review
- Age-Dependent Changes in Bone Architecture, Patterning, and Biomechanics During Skeletal Regeneration.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Bone regeneration is a critical area of research impacting treatment of diseases such as osteoporosis, age-related decline, and orthopaedic implants. A crucial question in bone regeneration is that of bone architectural quality, or how "good" is the regenerated bone tissue structurally? Current methods address typical long bone architecture, however there exists a need for improved ability to quantify structurally relevant parameters of bone in non-standard bone shapes. Here we present a new analysis approach based on open-source semi-automatic methods combining image processing, solid modeling, and numerical calculations to analyze bone tissue at a more granular level using μCT image data from a mouse digit model of bone regeneration. Examining interior architecture, growth patterning, spatial mineral content, and mineral density distribution, these methods are then applied to two types of 6-month old mouse digits - 1) those prior to amputation injury (unamputated) and 2) those 42 days after amputation when bone has regenerated. Results show regenerated digits exhibit increased inner void fraction, decreased patterning, different patterns of spatial mineral distribution, and increased mineral density values when compared to unamputated bone. Our approach demonstrates the utility of this new analysis technique in assessment of non-standard bone models, such as the regenerated bone of the digit, and aims to bring a deeper level of analysis with an open-source, integrative platform to the greater bone community.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.