Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33466400›Full record

ReviewJournal of functional morphology and kinesiology2021

Ex Vivo Systems to Study Chondrogenic Differentiation and Cartilage Integration.

Graziana Monaco, Alicia J El Haj, Mauro Alini, Martin J Stoddart

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of functional morphology and kinesiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Cartilage Repair: Promise of Adhesive Orthopedic Hydrogels.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Particulate cartilage and platelet-rich plasma treatment for knee chondral defects in sheep.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2023
    Article
  9. Extracellular Vesicles Secreted by TGF-Stem cells international · 2023
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

4 authors.

Graziana MonacoAO Research Institute Davos, Clavadelerstrasse 8, CH-7270 Davos Platz, Switzerland.
Alicia J El HajSchool of Pharmacy & Bioengineering Research, University of Keele, Keele ST5 5BG, UK.
Mauro AliniAO Research Institute Davos, Clavadelerstrasse 8, CH-7270 Davos Platz, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-0262-1412
Martin J StoddartAO Research Institute Davos, Clavadelerstrasse 8, CH-7270 Davos Platz, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-9538-1517

Funding

AO Foundation N/A
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Articular cartilage injury and repair is an issue of growing importance. Although common, defects of articular cartilage present a unique clinical challenge due to its poor self-healing capacity, which is largely due to its avascular nature. There is a critical need to better study and understand cellular healing mechanisms to achieve more effective therapies for cartilage regeneration. This article aims to describe the key features of cartilage which is being modelled using tissue engineered cartilage constructs and ex vivo systems. These models have been used to investigate chondrogenic differentiation and to study the mechanisms of cartilage integration into the surrounding tissue. The review highlights the key regeneration principles of articular cartilage repair in healthy and diseased joints. Using co-culture models and novel bioreactor designs, the basis of regeneration is aligned with recent efforts for optimal therapeutic interventions.

Indexed as

bioreactorsintegrationosteochondraltissue engineering

Identifiers

PMID33466400
PMCPMC7838775

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.