ArticleEuropean journal of translational myology2025
Regenerative response of rat skeletal muscle to the implantation of a collagen-based bone graft substitute: an
Article in European journal of translational myology, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The application of implantable biomaterials in reconstructive grafting is a common practice in surgical fields such as orthopedics, maxillary and plastic surgery. This study explores the regenerative response of skeletal muscle to a porous bovine collagen-based matrix (Osteovit®) in a volumetric muscle loss injury model. Forty male Wistar rats were divided into four groups. Normal control underwent no procedure and regenerative control had mepivacaine injected in the tibialis anterior muscle to provoke a standard regenerative response. In the other two groups, a volumetric defect was created in the tibialis anterior muscle; the fibrosis control had no treatment, while the collagen-scaffolding group had a bone substitution matrix implanted. Animals were sacrificed at 21, 28, and 60 days post-procedure for histological, histochemical, immunohistochemical and histomorphometry analysis to evaluate muscle architecture and myogenic regenerative response. Significant changes in tissue architecture among groups, with a notable emphasis on the integration of the collagen scaffold, were demonstrated. This was also confirmed at the histomorphometry analysis, which found differences at the cross-sectional area, minor diameter and form factor values between groups The bone substitution matrix did not inhibit regeneration but promoted an abnormal one. This can be explained by the excessive formation of connective tissue, which led to the genesis of intramuscular tendons that may have interfered with the normal development of regenerative muscle fibers. The findings highlight the need for further investigation into the cellular mechanisms underlying skeletal muscle regeneration in response to implantable biomaterials.
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.