Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35681447›Full record

ArticleCells2022

Enthesis Healing Is Dependent on Scaffold Interphase Morphology-Results from a Rodent Patellar Model.

Carlos J Peniche Silva, Sebastian A Müller, Nicholas Quirk, Patrina S P Poh, Carla Mayer, Antonella Motta, Claudio Migliaresi, Michael J Coenen, Christopher H Evans, Elizabeth R Balmayor and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cells, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Advanced therapies in orthopaedics.EFORT open reviews · 2024
    Review
  4. Interfacial Tissue Regeneration with Bone.Current osteoporosis reports · 2024
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

11 authors.

Carlos J Peniche SilvacBITE, MERLN Institute for Technology-Inspired Regenerative Medicine, Maastricht University, 6229 ER Maastricht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-2290-8269
Sebastian A MüllerMusculoskeletal Gene Therapy Laboratory, Rehabilitation Medicine Research Center, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905, USA.
Nicholas QuirkMusculoskeletal Gene Therapy Laboratory, Rehabilitation Medicine Research Center, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-8911-6143
Patrina S P PohBerlin Institute of Health at Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Julius Wolff Institute, 13353 Berlin, Germany.
Carla MayerDepartment of General, Visceral and Minimally Invasive Surgery and Endoscopy, Dr. Lubos Kliniken Bogenhausen, 81679 Munich, Germany.
Antonella MottaBIOtech Research Center and European Institute of Excellence on Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine, Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Trento, 38123 Trento, Italy.
Claudio MigliaresiBIOtech Research Center and European Institute of Excellence on Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine, Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Trento, 38123 Trento, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-0628-0053
Michael J CoenenMusculoskeletal Gene Therapy Laboratory, Rehabilitation Medicine Research Center, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905, USA.
Christopher H EvansMusculoskeletal Gene Therapy Laboratory, Rehabilitation Medicine Research Center, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905, USA.
Elizabeth R BalmayorMusculoskeletal Gene Therapy Laboratory, Rehabilitation Medicine Research Center, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-0484-4847
Martijn van GriensvencBITE, MERLN Institute for Technology-Inspired Regenerative Medicine, Maastricht University, 6229 ER Maastricht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-5104-9881

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The use of multiphasic scaffolds to treat injured tendon-to-bone entheses has shown promising results in vitro. Here, we used two versions of a biphasic silk fibroin scaffold to treat an enthesis defect created in a rat patellar model in vivo. One version presented a mixed transition between the bony and the tendon end of the construct (S-MT) while this transition was abrupt in the second version (S-AT). At 12 weeks after surgery, the S-MT scaffold promoted better healing of the injured enthesis, with minimal undesired ossification of the insertion area. The expression of tenogenic and chondrogenic markers was sustained for longer in the S-MT-treated group and the tangent modulus of the S-MT-treated samples was similar to the native tissue at 12 weeks while that of the S-AT-treated enthesis was lower. Our study highlights the important role of the transition zone of multiphasic scaffolds in the treatment of complex interphase tissues such as the tendon-to-bone enthesis.

Indexed as

FibroinsTendon InjuriesTissue ScaffoldsWound HealingAnimalsInterphaseRatsTendonsFibroinsenthesismultiphasicscaffoldsilk fibrointendon

Identifiers

PMID35681447
PMCPMC9179925

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.