ArticleTissue engineering and regenerative medicine2025
Corneal Endothelium Regeneration with Decellularized Porcine Corneal Extracellular Matrix Scaffolds.
Article in Tissue engineering and regenerative medicine, 2025. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTo evaluate the structural, biochemical, and functional performance of decellularized porcine corneal extracellular matrix (dECM) scaffolds for engineering human corneal endothelium.
methodsPorcine corneas were decellularized using either 0.3% sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) or 1.5 M sodium chloride (NaCl), followed by enzymatic nucleic acid digestion. Histological and biochemical analyses were performed to assess decellularization efficiency and extracellular matrix preservation. Human corneal endothelial cells (hCECs) were cultured on SDS-dECM scaffolds to evaluate cytocompatibility, morphology, and functional outcomes. Therapeutic efficacy was further assessed using a rabbit model of corneal endothelial dystrophy (CED).
resultsSDS-treated corneas showed superior nuclear clearance (residual DNA: 123.60 ± 8.92 ng/mg) compared to NaCl (146.15 ± 5.49 ng/mg), with 95.2% retention of sulfated glycosaminoglycans (sGAGs) and moderate collagen loss (40% of native). In contrast, NaCl better preserved collagen (100% of native) but exhibited incomplete decellularization and lower sGAG retention (71.0%). In vitro, hCECs cultured on SDS-dECM exhibited progressive proliferation, with cell viability surpassing that of TCPS by day 14 (389.01 ± 5.68 vs. 359.65 ± 7.92, p < 0.05). Immunofluorescence confirmed polygonal morphology and ZO-1 expression, indicating intact barrier phenotype. Transparency of dECM scaffolds improved with hCEC culture, with light transmittance at 400 nm increasing from 65.82% (acellular) to 90.13% (double-sided culture). In vivo transplantation of hCEC-seeded SDS-dECM resulted in dose-dependent corneal clarity restoration, with the high-dose group achieving transparency and pachymetry comparable to normal corneas (thickness ~ 602 µm, grading score 0.00 ± 0.00) by 16 weeks.
conclusionsSDS-dECM scaffolds demonstrated excellent biocompatibility and functional support for human corneal endothelial cells, both in vitro and in vivo. These findings support their potential use as bioengineered alternatives to donor corneas for treating endothelial dysfunction.
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.