Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39035556›Full record

ReviewThe Saudi dental journal2024

Bioengineering from the laboratory to clinical translation in oral and maxillofacial reconstruction.

Ola M Maria, Ashraf Heram, Simon D Tran

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The Saudi dental journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

3 authors.

Ola M MariaFaculty of Dental Medicine and Oral Health Sciences, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Ashraf HeramGrand Strand Facial and Jaw Surgery, Myrtle Beach, SC, United States.
Simon D TranFaculty of Dental Medicine and Oral Health Sciences, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Conventional techniques used in oral and maxillofacial reconstruction focus mainly on utilizing autologous tissues that have unquestionably improved function and esthetics for many patients, worldwide. However, the success depends on countless factors such as: donor and recipient sites conditions, patient's medical history, surgeon's experience, restricted availability of high-quality autogenous tissues or stem cells, and increased surgical cost and time. Materials and Methods: Lately, teaming researchers, scientists, surgeons, and engineers, to address these limitations, have allowed tremendous progress in recombinant protein therapy, cell-based therapy, and gene therapy. Results: Over the past few years, biomedical engineering has been evolving from the laboratory to clinical applications, for replacement of damaged body tissues due to trauma, cancer, congenital or acquired disorders. Conclusions: This review provides an outlook on the content, benefits, recent advances, limitations, and future expectations of biomedical engineering for salivary glands, oral mucosa, dental structures, and maxillofacial reconstruction.

Indexed as

Biomedical engineeringReconstructionRegenerationSalivary glandsStem cellsTissue engineering

Identifiers

PMID39035556
PMCPMC11255950

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.