ArticleTissue engineering and regenerative medicine2024
Determining Which Hydrostatic Pressure Regimes Promote Osteogenesis in Human Mesenchymal Stem Cells.
Article in Tissue engineering and regenerative medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Macrophage-MSCs Interplay in Orthodontic Bone Remodelling: Mechanics-Immunity-Stem Cell Axis.International dental journal · 2026Review
- Pretreated mesenchymal stromal cells and their secretome for kidney disease: mechanisms and applications.Stem cell research & therapy · 2026Review
- Hydrostatic Pressure Induces Osteogenic Differentiation of Single Stem Cells in 3D Viscoelastic Microgels.Small science · 2025Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCompressive loading of bone causes hydrostatic pressure changes which have been proposed as an osteogenic differentiation stimulus for mesenchymal stem cells (hMSCs). We hypothesised that hMSCs are adapted to differentiate only in response to cyclic hydrostatic pressures above critical thresholds of magnitude and frequency which correspond to physiological levels of anabolic bone loading.
methodsUsing a pneumatic-hydrostatic bioreactor, we applied hydrostatic pressure regimes to human hMSCs in 3D collagen hydrogel cultures for 1 h/day over 28 days to determine which levels of pressure and frequency stimulated osteogenesis in vitro.
resultsStimulation of the 3D cultures with 0-280 kPa cyclic hydrostatic pressure at 1 Hz resulted in up to 75% mineralisation in the hydrogel (without exogenous growth factors), whilst static culture or variations of the regime with either constant high pressure (280 kPa, 0 Hz), low-frequency (0.05 Hz, 280 kPa) or low-magnitude (70 kPa, 1 Hz) stimulation had no osteogenic effects (< 2% mineralisation). Nuclear translocation of YAP was observed following cyclic hydrostatic pressure in mature MLO-A5 osteoblasts but not in hMSCs, suggesting that cyclic hydrostatic pressure activates different mechanotransduction pathways in undifferentiated stem cells and committed osteoblasts.
conclusionsHydrostatic pressure is a potent stimulus for differentiating MSC into highly active osteoblasts and may therefore be a versatile tool for translational cell engineering. We have demonstrated that there are minimum levels of force and frequency needed to trigger osteogenesis, i.e. a pressure 'switch', which corresponds to the physiological forces experienced by cells in their native mesenchymal niche. The mechanotransduction mechanisms underpinning these effects are the subject of further study.
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.