Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37046354›Full record

ArticleStem cell research & therapy2023

FLIM imaging revealed spontaneous osteogenic differentiation of stem cells on gradient pore size tissue-engineered constructs.

Svetlana Rodimova, Artem Mozherov, Vadim Elagin, Maria Karabut, Ilya Shchechkin, Dmitry Kozlov, Dmitry Krylov, Alena Gavrina, Vladislav Kaplin, Evgenii Epifanov and 6 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Stem cell research & therapy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 44% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

16 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Svetlana RodimovaN. I. Lobachevsky Nizhny Novgorod National Research State University, 23 Gagarina Ave., Nizhny Novgorod, Russia, 603022. srodimova123@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0002-4454-2931
Artem MozherovN. I. Lobachevsky Nizhny Novgorod National Research State University, 23 Gagarina Ave., Nizhny Novgorod, Russia, 603022.
Vadim ElaginInstitute of Experimental Oncology and Biomedical Technologies, Privolzhsky Research Medical University, 10/1 Minin and Pozharsky Sq., Nizhny Novgorod, Russia, 603000.
Maria KarabutInstitute of Experimental Oncology and Biomedical Technologies, Privolzhsky Research Medical University, 10/1 Minin and Pozharsky Sq., Nizhny Novgorod, Russia, 603000.
Ilya ShchechkinN. I. Lobachevsky Nizhny Novgorod National Research State University, 23 Gagarina Ave., Nizhny Novgorod, Russia, 603022.
Dmitry KozlovN. I. Lobachevsky Nizhny Novgorod National Research State University, 23 Gagarina Ave., Nizhny Novgorod, Russia, 603022.
Dmitry KrylovN. I. Lobachevsky Nizhny Novgorod National Research State University, 23 Gagarina Ave., Nizhny Novgorod, Russia, 603022.
Alena GavrinaN. I. Lobachevsky Nizhny Novgorod National Research State University, 23 Gagarina Ave., Nizhny Novgorod, Russia, 603022.
Vladislav KaplinSemenov Federal Research Center of Chemical Physics, Russian Academy of Sciences, 4 Kosygina St, Moscow, Russia, 119991.
Evgenii EpifanovResearch Center "Crystallography and Photonics", Institute of Photonic Technologies, Russian Academy of Sciences, 2 Pionerskaya St, Troitsk, Moscow, Russia, 108840.
Nikita MinaevInstitute for Regenerative Medicine, Sechenov University, 8-2 Trubetskaya Str, Moscow, Russia, 119991.
Ksenia BardakovaResearch Center "Crystallography and Photonics", Institute of Photonic Technologies, Russian Academy of Sciences, 2 Pionerskaya St, Troitsk, Moscow, Russia, 108840.
Anna SolovievaSemenov Federal Research Center of Chemical Physics, Russian Academy of Sciences, 4 Kosygina St, Moscow, Russia, 119991.
Peter TimashevInstitute for Regenerative Medicine, Sechenov University, 8-2 Trubetskaya Str, Moscow, Russia, 119991.
Elena ZagaynovaN. I. Lobachevsky Nizhny Novgorod National Research State University, 23 Gagarina Ave., Nizhny Novgorod, Russia, 603022.
Daria KuznetsovaN. I. Lobachevsky Nizhny Novgorod National Research State University, 23 Gagarina Ave., Nizhny Novgorod, Russia, 603022.
Privolzhsky Research Medical University · RURussian Academy of Sciences · RUSechenov University · RUSemenov Institute of Chemical Physics · RU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is an urgent clinical need for targeted strategies aimed at the treatment of bone defects resulting from fractures, infections or tumors. 3D scaffolds represent an alternative to allogeneic MSC transplantation, due to their mimicry of the cell niche and the preservation of tissue structure. The actual structure of the scaffold itself can affect both effective cell adhesion and its osteoinductive properties. Currently, the effects of the structural heterogeneity of scaffolds on the behavior of cells and tissues at the site of damage have not been extensively studied.

methodsBoth homogeneous and heterogeneous scaffolds were generated from poly(L-lactic acid) methacrylated in supercritical carbon dioxide medium and were fabricated by two-photon polymerization. The homogeneous scaffolds consist of three layers of cylinders of the same diameter, whereas the heterogeneous (gradient pore sizes) scaffolds contain the middle layer of cylinders of increased diameter, imitating the native structure of spongy bone. To evaluate the osteoinductive properties of both types of scaffold, we performed in vitro and in vivo experiments. Multiphoton microscopy with fluorescence lifetime imaging microscopy was used for determining the metabolic states of MSCs, as a sensitive marker of cell differentiation. The results obtained from this approach were verified using standard markers of osteogenic differentiation and based on data from morphological analysis.

resultsThe heterogeneous scaffolds showed improved osteoinductive properties, accelerated the metabolic rearrangements associated with osteogenic differentiation, and enhanced the efficiency of bone tissue recovery, thereby providing for both the development of appropriate morphology and mineralization.

conclusionsThe authors suggest that the heterogeneous tissue constructs are a promising tool for the restoration of bone defects. And, furthermore, that our results demonstrate that the use of label-free bioimaging methods can be considered as an effective approach for intravital assessment of the efficiency of differentiation of MSCs on scaffolds.

Indexed as

Mesenchymal Stem CellsOsteogenesisCell DifferentiationCells, CulturedStem CellsTissue EngineeringTissue ScaffoldsBone defectsFLIMHeterogeneous scaffoldsMSCMultiphoton microscopy

Identifiers

PMID37046354
PMCPMC10091689
OpenAlexW4365145213

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.