ArticleEuropean oral research2021
Evaluation of a collagen-bioaggregate composite scaffold in the repair of sheep pulp tissue.
Article in European oral research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Hydrogel-based strategies for dentin-pulp complex regeneration: a comprehensive review.Cell and tissue banking · 2026Review
- Bioactive ceramic-based materials: beneficial properties and potential applications in dental repair and regeneration.Regenerative medicine · 2024Review
- Neural Regeneration in Regenerative Endodontic Treatment: An Overview and Current Trends.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study aimed to compare the effects of the collagen-BioAggregate mixture (CBA-M) and collagen-BioAggregate composite (CBA-C) sponge as a scaffolding material on the reparative dentin formation. MATERIALS AND
methodsCBA-C sponge (10:1 w/w) was obtained and characterized by Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) and Mercury Porosimetry. Cytotoxicity of the CBA-C sponge was tested by using the L929 mouse fibroblast cell line. Dental pulp stem cells (DPSCs) were isolated from the pulp tissue of sheep teeth and characterized by flow cytometry for the presence of mesenchymal stem cell marker, CD44. The osteogenic differentiation capability of isolated DPSCs was studied by Alizarin Red staining. The cells were then used to study for the compatibility of CBA-C sponge with cell proliferation and calcium phosphate deposition. The effect of CBA-C sponge and CBA-M on the induction of dentin regeneration was studied in the perforated teeth of sheep for the eight-week period. All the analyses were performed with appropriate statistical hypothesis tests.
resultsCBA-C sponge was found to be biocompatible for DPSCs. The DPSCs seeded on the CBA-C sponge were able to differentiate into the osteoblastic lineage and deposit calcium phosphate crystals in vitro. Reparative dentin formation was observed after the second week in the CBA-C sponge applied group. At the end of eight weeks, a complete reparative dentin structure was formed in the CBA-C sponge applied group, whereas necrotic tissue residues were observed in groups treated with the CBA-M.
conclusionCBA-C sponge represents a better microenvironment for reparative dentin formation probably due to maintaining DPSCs and allowing their osteogenic differentiation and thus calcium phosphate deposition.
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.