ArticleJournal of advanced periodontology & implant dentistry2020
Effect of two commercial acellular dermal scaffolds on biological behavior of human gingival fibroblasts.
Article in Journal of advanced periodontology & implant dentistry, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Biological behavior of mesenchymal stem cells on two types of commercial dermal scaffolds: An in vitro study.Journal of advanced periodontology & implant dentistry · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Periodontal regeneration is an essential goal of periodontal therapy. Acellular dermal matrix (ADM) has been recommended as an alternative to autogenous grafts. However, since it is devoid of cells and vasculature, there are concerns regarding the biological behavior of cells on ADM. This study aimed to assess the effects of two commonly used ADMs on biological behavior, i.e., attachment and proliferation, of human gingival fibroblasts (HGFs). Methods: This in vitro, experimental study was conducted on explanted and cultured HGFs. ADM types 1 and 2 (n=26; measuring 10×15 mm) were rinsed with saline solution, adapted to the bottom of 52 wells, exposed to HGFs with a cell density of 16,000 cells/mL, and incubated at 37°C for 12, 24, and 84 hours and seven days. Cell attachment was assessed 12 hours after incubation using 4›,6-diamidino-2-phenylindole (DAPI) and methyl-thiazol-diphenyl-tetrazolium (MTT) assay under a fluorescence microscope. Cell viability was assessed at 24 and 84 hours and one week using the MTT assay. Cells were then platinum-coated, and their morphology was evaluated under a scanning electron microscope (SEM). Data were analyzed using ANOVA. Results: HGFs were evaluated in 60 samples in three groups (n=20). Cell attachment was the same in the three groups, as shown by the MTT assay and DAPI test (P=0.6). Cell viability at one week was 3.73±0.02, 2.88±0.29, and 2.13±0.24 in the control, ADM 1, and ADM 2 groups, respectively. The difference was statistically significant (P=0.01). Conclusion: Both scaffolds were the same in terms of attachment of HGFs. However, ADM 1 was superior to ADM2 in terms of cell viability and morphology at one week. It was concluded that the quality of acellular dermal scaffolds could significantly influence cellular behaviors and tissue maturation.
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.