Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35629294›Full record

ReviewLife (Basel, Switzerland)2022

Spleen: Reparative Regeneration and Influence on Liver.

Andrey Elchaninov, Polina Vishnyakova, Gennady Sukhikh, Timur Fatkhudinov

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Life (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
4.1field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Cellular effects of splenectomy on liver regeneration after 70% resection.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. An Eye on Kupffer Cells: Development, Phenotype and the Macrophage Niche.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    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 1 country.

Andrey ElchaninovLaboratory of Regenerative Medicine, National Medical Research Center for Obstetrics, Gynecology and Perinatology Named after Academician V.I. Kulakov of Ministry of Healthcare of Russian Federation, 117997 Moscow, Russia.ORCID 0000-0002-2392-4439
Polina VishnyakovaLaboratory of Regenerative Medicine, National Medical Research Center for Obstetrics, Gynecology and Perinatology Named after Academician V.I. Kulakov of Ministry of Healthcare of Russian Federation, 117997 Moscow, Russia.ORCID 0000-0001-8650-8240
Gennady SukhikhLaboratory of Regenerative Medicine, National Medical Research Center for Obstetrics, Gynecology and Perinatology Named after Academician V.I. Kulakov of Ministry of Healthcare of Russian Federation, 117997 Moscow, Russia.
Timur FatkhudinovHistology Department, Medical Institute, Peoples' Friendship University of Russia, 117198 Moscow, Russia.ORCID 0000-0002-6498-5764
Peoples' Friendship University of Russia · RUNational Medical Research Center for Obstetrics, Gynecology and Perinatology named after Academician V.I.Kulakov of the Ministry of Healthcare of the Russian Federation · RU

Funding

President grant for young Russian scientists МК-1573.2022.3RUDN University Strategic Academic Leadership Program RUDN University Strategic Academic Leadership ProgramState Assignment "Development of a method for the treatment of ovarian cancer using macrophages with persistent pro-inflammatoryproperties" No 121040600409-1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This review considers experimental findings on splenic repair, obtained in two types of small animal (mouse, rat, and rabbit) models: splenic resections and autologous transplantations of splenic tissue. Resection experiments indicate that the spleen is able to regenerate, though not necessarily to the initial volume. The recovery lasts one month and preserves the architecture, albeit with an increase in the relative volume of lymphoid follicles. The renovated tissues, however, exhibit skewed functional profiles; notably, the decreased production of antibodies and the low cytotoxic activity of T cells, consistent with the decline of T-dependent zones and prolonged reduction in T cell numbers. Species-specific differences are evident as well, with the post-repair organ mass deficiency most pronounced in rabbit models. Autotransplantations of splenic material are of particular clinical interest, as the procedure can possibly mitigate the development of post-splenectomy syndrome. Under these conditions, regeneration lasts 1-2 months, depending on the species. The transplants effectively destroy senescent erythrocytes, assist in microbial clearance, and produce antibodies, thus averting sepsis and bacterial pneumonia. Meanwhile, cellular sources of splenic recovery in such models remain obscure, as well as the time required for T and B cell number reconstitution.

Indexed as

liverregenerationresectionspleentransplantation

Identifiers

PMID35629294
PMCPMC9148119
OpenAlexW4224323659

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.