ArticleBioengineering (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Bilayer Type I Atelocollagen Scaffolds for In Vivo Regeneration of Articular Cartilage Defects.
Article in Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland), 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Articular cartilage has limited regenerative potential due to its anatomical characteristics, making complete recovery from damage challenging. Microfracture (MFx) is a widely used technique to promote cartilage healing, often enhanced with scaffolds to improve outcomes. In this study, we compared the efficacy of bilayer atelocollagen and standard collagen scaffolds combined with MFx in treating osteochondral defects in a rabbit model. Three articular cartilage defects were created in the femoral condyle of each rabbit and treated with either MFx plus a bilayer atelocollagen scaffold (test group), MFx plus a standard collagen scaffold (positive group), or MFx alone (negative group). Macroscopic and histological assessments were performed at 3, 6, and 12 weeks. By week 12, macroscopic examination showed hyaline-like cartilage restoration in the test group, while the positive group exhibited restoration with some overgrowth, and the negative group showed no restoration. Histological analysis revealed significantly better restoration in the test group than in the negative group, with comparable outcomes between the test and positive groups. These findings suggest that bilayer atelocollagen scaffold implantation following MFx is a promising treatment for articular cartilage defects and may provide a viable therapeutic option for patients with cartilage damage.
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.