Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36434165›Full record

ArticleCell and tissue banking2023

Characterization of an advanced viable bone allograft with preserved native bone-forming cells.

Elena Gianulis, Bradley Wetzell, Danielle Scheunemann, Patrick Gazzolo, Payal Sohoni, Mark A Moore, Jingsong Chen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cell and tissue banking, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
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

7 authors.

Elena GianulisGlobal Scientific Affairs and Clinical Engagement, LifeNet Health®, 1864 Concert Dr., Virginia Beach, VA, 23453, USA. elena_gianulis@lifenethealth.org.
Bradley WetzellGlobal Scientific Affairs and Clinical Engagement, LifeNet Health®, 1864 Concert Dr., Virginia Beach, VA, 23453, USA.
Danielle ScheunemannGlobal Scientific Affairs and Clinical Engagement, LifeNet Health®, 1864 Concert Dr., Virginia Beach, VA, 23453, USA.
Patrick GazzoloGlobal Spine and General Orthopedics, LifeNet Health®, Virginia Beach, VA, USA.
Payal SohoniGlobal Trauma and CMF, LifeNet Health®, Virginia Beach, VA, USA.
Mark A MooreGlobal Scientific Affairs and Clinical Engagement, LifeNet Health®, 1864 Concert Dr., Virginia Beach, VA, 23453, USA.
Jingsong ChenInstitute of Regenerative Medicine, LifeNet Health®, Virginia Beach, VA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Bone grafts are widely used to successfully restore structure and function to patients with a broad range of musculoskeletal ailments and bone defects. Autogenous bone grafts are historically preferred because they theoretically contain the three essential components of bone healing (ie, osteoconductivity, osteoinductivity, and osteogenicity), but they have inherent limitations. Allograft bone derived from deceased human donors is one alternative that is also capable of providing both an osteoconductive scaffold and osteoinductive potential but, until recently, lacked the osteogenic component of bone healing. Relatively new, cellular bone allografts (CBAs) were designed to address this need by preserving viable cells. Although most commercially-available CBAs feature mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs), osteogenic differentiation is time-consuming and complex. A more advanced graft, a viable bone allograft (VBA), was thus developed to preserve lineage-committed bone-forming cells, which may be more suitable than MSCs to promote bone fusion. The purpose of this paper was to present the results of preclinical research characterizing VBA. Through a comprehensive series of in vitro and in vivo assays, the present results demonstrate that VBA in its final form is capable of providing all three essential bone remodeling properties and contains viable lineage-committed bone-forming cells, which do not elicit an immune response. The results are discussed in the context of clinical evidence published to date that further supports VBA as a potential alternative to autograft without the associated drawbacks.

Indexed as

AllograftsBone TransplantationBone Marrow CellsBone MatrixCalciumCell ProliferationHistocompatibilityHumansOsteocytesTransplantation, AutologousCalciumBone graftBone regenerationBone void fillerCellular bone allograftViable bone allograftViviGen

Identifiers

PMID36434165
PMCPMC10209280

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.