ArticleJournal of advanced periodontology & implant dentistry2024
Biological behavior of mesenchymal stem cells on two types of commercial dermal scaffolds: An in vitro study.
Article in Journal of advanced periodontology & implant dentistry, 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.
- Stem cell therapy for regenerating periodontal bony defects: A narrative review.Journal of advanced periodontology & implant dentistry · 2025Review
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Acellular dermal matrix (ADM) has been introduced as an alternative to autogenous grafts. This study assessed the biological behavior of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) on two types of commercial ADM scaffolds. Methods: The present in vitro study investigated the behavior of MSCs cultured on scaffold type I CenoDerm® (Tissue Regeneration Corporation) and type II Acellular Dermis (Iranian Tissue Product Co.) as the test groups and an empty well plate as the control group (n=78). Cell attachment was assessed after 12 hours of incubation using 6,4-diamidino-2-phenylindole (DAPI) staining and methyl thiazole tetrazolium (MTT) assay. Cell proliferation was assessed using the MTT assay at 24- and 84-hour and 7-day intervals. Cell morphology was also assessed under a scanning electron microscope (SEM) at 24 hours. MTT assay and DAPI staining were repeated for five samples in all the three groups. Mann-Whitney, ANOVA, and post hoc Tukey tests were used for statistical analysis. Results: The DAPI staining and MTT assay showed similar results concerning cell attachment between all the groups at 12 hours ( Conclusion: Both scaffolds were similar in MSC attachment, but scaffold I appeared superior to scaffold II in terms of MSC proliferation and morphology in vitro.
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.