Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39655138›Full record

ReviewCureus2024

The Chick Embryo Chorioallantoic Membrane (CAM) Assay: A Novel Experimental Model in Dental Research.

Borislav Dusan Caplar, Marius Mihai Togoe, Domenico Ribatti, Daniela Pop, Cosmin Sinescu, Mihai Rominu, Emanuela Lidia Petrescu, Meda Lavinia Negrutiu, Eugen Melnic, Anca Maria Cimpean

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

10 authors.

Borislav Dusan CaplarDepartment of Prostheses Technology and Dental Materials, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Dental Research Center Using Conventional and Alternative Technologies, "Victor Babes" University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Timisoara, ROU.
Marius Mihai TogoeDepartment of Prostheses Technology and Dental Materials, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Dental Research Center Using Conventional and Alternative Technologies, "Victor Babes" University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Timisoara, ROU.
Domenico RibattiDepartment of Translational Biomedicine and Neuroscience, University of Bari Medical School, Bari, ITA.
Daniela PopDepartment of Prostheses Technology and Dental Materials, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Dental Research Center Using Conventional and Alternative Technologies, "Victor Babes" University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Timisoara, ROU.
Cosmin SinescuDepartment of Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, "Victor Babes" University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Timisoara, ROU.
Mihai RominuDepartment of Prostheses Technology and Dental Materials, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Dental Research Center Using Conventional and Alternative Technologies, "Victor Babes" University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Timisoara, ROU.
Emanuela Lidia PetrescuDepartment of Prostheses Technology and Dental Materials, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Dental Research Center Using Conventional and Alternative Technologies, "Victor Babes" University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Timisoara, ROU.
Meda Lavinia NegrutiuDepartment of Prostheses Technology and Dental Materials, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Dental Research Center Using Conventional and Alternative Technologies, "Victor Babes" University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Timisoara, ROU.
Eugen MelnicDepartment of Pathology, Nicolae Testemitanu State University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Chișinău, MDA.
Anca Maria CimpeanDepartment of Microscopic Morphology/Histology, "Victor Babes" University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Timisoara, ROU.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Animal experimental models are ruled out by respecting the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction, Refinement) rules which governed the experimental research for decades with an increased tendency to minimize as much as it is possible any pain suffering or distress that the animals might feel. The chick embryo chorioallantoic membrane (CAM) model is an alternative to other experimental models due to its superior properties compared to other animal models. The CAM is painless by itself due to the lack of innervation and has no immune cells till the 11th day of incubation. Thus, it is extensively used for implanting malignant tumors and assessing them in relation to their metastatic and angiogenic potential. Also, various biomaterials from collagen to hard scaffolds can be implanted on the CAM surface and analyzed mainly related to their property of inducing inflammation. Dental research often uses mouse or rabbit models for experimental purposes. Different surgical techniques from experimentally induced periodontal disease to experimental dental implants may cause pain and suffering to animals. Due to all these arguments, the CAM model is a quick, cheap, and reliable alternative to other animal experimental models used in dental research. Despite its usefulness as an experimental model for different applications, ranging from inflammation studies to cancer research, the CAM model is insufficiently used in dental research. Currently, about 135 studies pertaining to this issue are available in PubMed, the majority of which focus on the reactivity of CAM vessels to various materials employed in dentistry. Limited data exist about the capacity of the CAM to promote osteogenic differentiation of dental stem cells or to enhance biomaterial integration into novel tissue architectures. The present review critically analyzed the use of the CAM model as an experimental tool in dental research. We selected from PubMed all the papers having as topic the CAM in dentistry by searching based on the following keywords: " chorioallantoic membrane, dentistry" or "chorioallantoic membrane, dental ". We focused on discussing the benefits and limitations of the CAM model in dental studies and its prospective role as a preclinical instrument for the assessment of dental tissues, biomaterials, or different dentistry-related substances prior to their use for various purposes in dental clinical practice. ​​​​​​The impact of the CAM model-derived preclinical findings on clinical practice will be also stated by mentioning "pros and cons" arguments. The last part of the present paper reviewed the perspective of CAM assay used in combination with other experimental techniques such as tooth organoids and also the strengths and weaknesses of other species CAM assays recently developed in ostrich and Nile crocodile CAMs.

Indexed as

biomaterialsbone augmentationchorioallantoic membrane (cam)dentistrystem cells

Identifiers

PMID39655138
PMCPMC11626256

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.