ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2025
The effects of mechanical stimulation on the morphology and function of spinal ligament cells.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 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
Abstract
backgroundIt has been shown that mechanical signaling in the cellular microenvironment is crucial for control at the cellular and tissue levels, affecting human growth and the prevalence of disease. Ligament cells from individuals with posterior longitudinal ligament ossification (OPLL) have been found to respond to external mechanical stimulation. However, the response of mechanical stimulation to OPLL ligament cells is unclear. This study aims to comprehensively assess the effects of mechanical stimulation on the proliferation, viability, shape and function of OPLL ligament cells.
methodsEleven OPLL and 11 non-OPLL patient-derived Ligament cells were selected for this study. cells of test groups were exposed to 10% uniaxial cyclic stretch at frequency of 0.5 Hz for 3 h to 48 h. Calcein-AM/PI/Hoechst33342 assay was used to detect the activity of ligament cells. The CCK8 test was used to investigate the effect of stretch on cell proliferation. The level expression of pro-inflammatory factors was detected by using RT-qPCR. Cytoskeleton staining was used to evaluate changes in cytoskeleton morphology.
resultsThe proportion of Live cells was not substantially different from the control group after stretch for 12 and 24 h. After 6 and 12 h of cyclic stretch, there was no discernible difference in the rate of cell proliferation; however, after 24 h and 48 h, the cell proliferation rate increased by 27% and 52%, respectively. Apart from the mRNA expression of IL-8 and GROa was 1.41 times and 1.43 times higher than that of the control group in 9-hour groups, and RANTES mRNA expression was 1.38 times higher than that of the control group in 6-hour groups, there was also no appreciable difference in the expression levels of inflammatory factors such as IL1β, TNFα and PF4. The Ligament cells became elongated and were rearranged after 12- and 24-hours' uniaxial stretch.
conclusionsCyclic stretch encourages OPLL ligament cell proliferation and alteration of the cytoskeleton structure, but it has no effect on the inflammatory response or cell activity, which provides a new insight into the pathophysiology of OPLL.
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.