ReviewMolecular medicine reports2025
Osteochondral tissue engineering‑based subchondral bone plate repair (Review).
Review in Molecular medicine reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Osteochondral defects are a series of pathological changes from the chondral surface to the deeper trabecular bone caused by trauma or degenerative changes; they typically induce serious joint dysfunction. Over the past few decades, various techniques have been attempted to repair these defects. Tissue‑engineered osteochondral grafts (TEOGs) with sophisticated architecture have been extensively explored for osteochondral regeneration. However, controversies persist regarding standards for clinical application of TEOGs. The present review focused on the design of TEOGs, emphasizing their capacity to repair the subchondral bone plate (SBP). The effect of animal models on techniques to repair osteochondral defects was also reviewed. To improve the evaluation of SBP regeneration, four typical histological characteristics (abnormal height, uneven surface, poor integration and loose internal structure) are summarized based on cases of unsatisfactory SBP regeneration. Incorporating mesenchymal stem cells with appropriate growth factors into trilayer or multilayer tissue‑engineered scaffolds is a promising strategy to avoid unsatisfactory SBP regeneration. Large animal models are recommended for translation to the clinic and there is a need to establish detailed and comprehensive osteochondral defect models in the future.
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.