ReviewCraniomaxillofacial trauma & reconstruction2024
Review of the Literature on the Current State of Periosteum-Mediated Craniofacial Bone Regeneration.
Review in Craniomaxillofacial trauma & reconstruction, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Janus Membranes as Multifunctional Nanostructures for Bone Defect Repair: Advances, Challenges, and Clinical Translation.International journal of nanomedicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Study Design: This is an article review on the current state of periosteum-mediated bone regeneration (PMBR). It is a known mandibular reconstruction option in children, and though poorly understood and unpredictable, the concerns of developmental changes to donor and recipient tissues shared by other treatment options are nonexistent. The definitive role of periosteum during bone regeneration remains largely unknown. Objective: The objective is to review the literature on the clinical and molecular mechanism evidence of this event. Methods: Our search methodology was modeled after the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis) guidelines. Search strategies were categorized into search 1 for clinical evidence of mandibular regeneration and search 2 for gene expression review for craniofacial regeneration. The quality assessment of each publication was undertaken, and inclusion criteria comprise mandibular continuity defect for search 1 and use of gene expression assay propriety kit for search 2. Results: 33 studies were selected for search 1 while four studies with non-human subjects were selected for search 2. Monitoring of PMBR onset was advised at 2 weeks post-operative, and the gene expression results showed an upregulation of genes responsible for angiogenesis, cytokine activities, and immune-inflammatory response in week 1 and skeletal development and signaling pathways in week 2. Conclusions: The results suggest that young periosteum has a higher probability of PMBR than adult periosteum, and skeletal morphogenesis regulated by skeletal developmental genes and pathways may characterize the gene expression patterns of PMBR.
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.