Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39968336›Full record

ReviewJournal of orthopaedic translation2025

Charting a quarter-century of commercial cartilage regeneration products.

Xinyi Liu, Xiaolei Guo, Yixuan Amy Pei, Ming Pei, Zigang Ge

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of orthopaedic translation, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

5 authors.

Xinyi LiuDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, College of Future Technology, Peking University, Beijing, China.
Xiaolei GuoCenter for Medical Device Evaluation, National Medical Products Administration, Beijing, China.
Yixuan Amy PeiPerelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA, 19104.
Ming PeiStem Cell and Tissue Engineering Laboratory, Department of Orthopaedics, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV, USA.
Zigang GeDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, College of Future Technology, Peking University, Beijing, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Functional cartilage regeneration remains difficult to achieve despite decades of research. Dozens of commercial products have been proposed, with each targeting different facets of successful cartilage engineering, including mechanical properties, integration, lubrication and inflammation; however, there remains a lack of breakthroughs in meaningful clinical outcomes. Prior research categorized commercial products based on their components and elucidated challenges faced during the market approval process. This paper, for the first time, comprehensively reviews the properties of commercial products covering the last 25 years, including design trends in components, compatibility with minimally invasive surgery, indications for cartilage defects, long-term follow-up, as well as active sponsorship support of the International Cartilage Regeneration and Joint Preservation Society (ICRS). We aim to summarize the key factors for potentially successful commercial products and elucidate overarching trends in technology development in this field. Given that no revolutionary products have yielded significantly improved clinical results, emerging products compete with one another on user-friendliness and cost-efficiency. Other relevant characteristics include compatibility with minimally invasive surgery, extensiveness of required surgery (one-stage vs. two-stage), use of versatile artificial polymers and application of cells and biomaterials. Specific products continue to lead the market due to their cost-efficiency or indications for larger cartilage defects. However, they have been shown to result in no significant improvement upon clinical follow-up. Thus, there is a need for products that surpass current commercial products and show clinical effectiveness.

Indexed as

Articular cartilageBiomaterialsCell therapyCommercial productsRegeneration

Identifiers

PMID39968336
PMCPMC11833628

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.