ArticleFrontiers in oncology2022
Stem-cell therapy
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Esophageal anastomotic leakage (EAL) is a severe complication usually occurring after esophagectomy. Although there are various therapeutic methods for EAL treatment, they have not achieved satisfactory results. A previous study showed that the combination of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) and fibrin scaffold (FS) can treat EAL. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of the injection of MSCs and FS through a new engraftment gastroscope for EAL treatment. Methods: Twelve adult pigs were randomly divided into the MSCs group (n = 6) and control group (n = 6). A stomach tube was then inserted through the leakage to construct the EAL model, which was removed after one week. The combination of MSCs and FS was autografted at the EAL site for pigs in the MSCs group using the tailor-made gastroscope while only FS was autografted for the pigs in the control group. Local status of EAL was evaluated using gastroscopy. Histological analyses and western blot (WB) were used to assess the gross specimens of esophagi around EALs. Results: Gastroscopy showed a higher closure rate and a lower infection rate in the MSCs group than in the control group. However, the mortality was not significantly different between the two groups. HE staining showed a severe inflammatory response with dispersive infiltration of inflammatory cells and unhealed leakage in the control group. However, the infiltration of inflammatory cells was not altered in the MSCs group, and the leakage was completely healed. WB analyses showed that Myogenin and α-SMA expressions were significantly higher in the MSCs group than in the control group. Conclusion: A porcine model of EAL was successfully developed by accessing the transplantation site through the esophagus. Further data revealed that the implantation of MSCs in FS
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.