SynthesisAdvanced healthcare materials2021
Systematic Comparison of Biomaterials-Based Strategies for Osteochondral and Chondral Repair in Large Animal Models.
Synthesis in Advanced healthcare materials, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Role of Biomaterials in the Development of Epithelial Support in 3D In Vitro Airway Epithelium Development: A Systematic Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Pooled it
- Systematic Comparison of Biomaterials-Based Strategies for Osteochondral and Chondral Repair in Large Animal Models.Advanced healthcare materials · 2021Pooled it
- Experimental models of osteoarthritis: Advances, limitations and rational selection for translational research.Journal of orthopaedic translation · 2026Review
- Unveiling the BMI Risk Threshold for Osteoarthritis: Multi-Database Causal and Nonlinear Evidence.Diabetes, obesity & metabolism · 2026Article
- Long-term Performance and Durability of Biomaterials and Implant Designs in Total Joint Arthroplasty and Spinal Fusion.Journal of orthopaedics and sports medicine · 2026Article
- Synergistic integration of biomaterials in orthopedic implantation for infection preventing and tissue engineering.Regenerative biomaterials · 2026Review
- HAMA-SBMA hydrogel with anti-inflammatory properties delivers cartilage organoids, boosting cartilage regeneration.Journal of nanobiotechnology · 2025Article
- ROS-Activated Nanohydrogel Scaffolds with Multi-Factors Controlled Release for Targeted Dual-Lineage Repair of Osteochondral Defects.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025Article
- Glycosphingolipids in Osteoarthritis and Cartilage-Regeneration Therapy: Mechanisms and Therapeutic Prospects Based on a Narrative Review of the Literature.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- Integrating bioprinting, cell therapies and drug delivery towards in vivo regeneration of cartilage, bone and osteochondral tissue.Drug delivery and translational research · 2024Review
- Article
- A rabbit osteochondral defect (OCD) model for evaluation of tissue engineered implants on their biosafety and efficacy in osteochondral repair.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2024Article
- Multiphasic scaffolds for the repair of osteochondral defects: Outcomes of preclinical studies.Bioactive materials · 2023Review
- Time-Dependent Anabolic Response of hMSC-Derived Cartilage Grafts to Hydrostatic Pressure.Journal of tissue engineering and regenerative medicine · 2023Article
- Mesenchymal Stem Cell Studies in the Goat Model for Biomedical Research-A Review of the Scientific Literature.Biology · 2022Review
- Chitosan-Based Biomaterials for Bone Tissue Engineering Applications: A Short Review.Polymers · 2022Review
- Articulation inspired by nature: a review of biomimetic and biologically active 3D printed scaffolds for cartilage tissue engineering.Biomaterials science · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Joint repair remains a major challenge in orthopaedics. Recent progress in biomaterial design has led to the fabrication of a plethora of promising devices. Pre-clinical testing of any joint repair strategy typically requires the use of large animal models (e.g., sheep, goat, pig or horse). Despite the key role of such models in clinical translation, there is still a lack of consensus regarding optimal experimental design, making it difficult to draw conclusions on their efficacy. In this context, the authors performed a systematic literature review and a risk of bias assessment on large animal models published between 2010 and 2020, to identify key experimental parameters that significantly affect the biomaterial therapeutic outcome and clinical translation potential (including defect localization, animal age/maturity, selection of controls, cell-free versus cell-laden). They determined that mechanically strong biomaterials perform better at the femoral condyles; while highlighted the importance of including native tissue controls to better evaluate the quality of the newly formed tissue. Finally, in cell-laded biomaterials, the pre-culture conditions played a more important role in defect repair than the cell type. In summary, here they present a systematic evaluation on how the experimental design of preclinical models influences biomaterial-based therapeutic outcomes in joint repair.
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.