ArticleInternational journal of molecular sciences2025
Exploring the Impact of Extraplatelet Content on Fibrin-Based Scaffold Performance for Regenerative Therapies.
Article in International journal of molecular sciences, 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.
- Fibrin-Based Biomaterials in Wound Healing and Soft Tissue Regeneration: Biological Mechanisms and Clinical Applications.Gels (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Engineering Regenerative Fibrin Scaffold from Balanced Protein-Concentrate Plasma: Structural and Biochemical Characterization.Pharmaceutics · 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study investigated the impact of increased extraplatelet content on the tissue regenerative capacity of platelet-rich plasma (PRP)-derived fibrin scaffolds. Comparative analyses were performed between a "balanced protein-concentrate plasma" (BPCP) and a standard PRP (sPRP), focusing on platelet and fibrinogen content, scaffold microstructure, and functional performance. Growth factor (GF) release kinetics from the scaffolds were quantified via ELISA over 10 days, while scaffold biomechanics were evaluated through rheological testing, indentation, energy dissipation, adhesion, and assessments of coagulation dynamics, biodegradation, swelling, and retraction. Microstructural analysis was conducted using scanning electron microscopy (SEM), with fiber diameter and porosity measurements. The results demonstrated that BPCP scaffolds released significantly higher amounts of GFs and total protein, especially beyond 24 h (*
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.