ReviewBiophysical reviews2025
Building a digital library on research into mineralizing vesicles: a systematic review-based approach.
Review in Biophysical reviews, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Comprehensive Dataset of Lipid Nanoparticle Compositions and Properties for Nucleic Acid Delivery.Scientific data · 2025Article
- Biophysical reviews (ISSUE 2 2025): LAFeBS, alive, kicking, and growing: the story continues...Biophysical reviews · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This systematic review consolidates current research on mineralizing extracellular vesicles, or matrix vesicles (MVs), including their isolation, characterization, and role in physiological and pathological calcification. We searched PubMed/Medline, Scopus, and Web of Knowledge by employing the keywords "matrix vesicles" or "collagenase-released matrix vesicles" or "mineralizing vesicles" and publishing years from 2000 to 2023. Seventy-one studies met the inclusion criteria. The studies described different experimental protocols, especially with respect to methods for isolating MVs, wherein digestion with collagenase combined with centrifugation was the most used. The studies employed characterization techniques, including the determination of alkaline phosphatase (ALP) and transmission electron microscopy (TEM), to assess the functionality, size, and morphology of MVs. MVs contain key proteins such as ALP, annexins, and osteocalcin, along with calcium and phosphate ions, which are all critical for precipitating apatite. In the studies, evaluation of ALP activity revealed that MVs are more effective for mineralization than their parent cells and, hence, a valuable tool to regenerate bone and to engineer tissues. On the other hand, MVs play an essential role in pathologies, and the studies showed how they contribute to vascular calcification. Despite the therapeutic potential of MVs, isolation methods and characterization protocols vary across the studies, so standardized methods are needed. We have consolidated the data resulting from this systematic review in an open digital library on MVs with free access to all researchers. The users of the digital library can apply filters and taxonomy to find and interconnect the data resulting from the review.
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.