ArticleCureus2024
Evaluation and In Vitro Study of an Electrospun Bone Tissue Membrane for Bone Regeneration: A Novel Perspective.
Article in Cureus, 2024. 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, 1 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
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives In the present study, electrospun bone tissue membrane (EBTM) was prepared using polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF), gelatin (gel), and demineralized bone matrix (DBM) by electrospinning method for its potential application in bone tissue regeneration. Materials and methods The prepared EBTM was evaluated using high-resolution scanning electron microscopy (HR-SEM), energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDX; Silicon Drift 2017, USA), thermogravimetric analysis (TGA), and mechanical properties such as tensile strength (MPa), elongation at break (%), flexibility (%), and water absorption (%). In vitro bioactivity testing of EBTM using simulated body fluid (SBF) was performed after 14 days of immersion. Cell viability was tested using human osteoblast-like cells (MG-63) to prove biocompatibility. Results EBTM had superior surface morphology, thermal stability, and mechanical strength. The mechanical properties of EBTM were promising, enabling its use in tissue engineering. Bioactivity test showed that the EBTM surface developed calcium (Ca) and phosphate (P) after 14 days of being immersed in SBF. Additionally, a biocompatibility investigation revealed that EBTM was covered with more viable cells. Conclusion EBTM with sufficient mechanical strength, thermal stability, surface morphology, Ca deposition, and biocompatibility could serve as a plausible material for bone tissue engineering (skin, ligament, cartilage, and bone).
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.