ArticleEuropean journal of medical research2025
Enhanced bone regeneration in critical-size defects using novel ultralong hydroxyapatite microtubes/chitosan composite scaffolds.
Article in European journal of medical research, 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.
- Review
- Nanoparticle-Enabled Modulation of the Bone Immune Microenvironment for Enhanced Regeneration.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
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
backgroundThis study evaluated the effects of hydroxyapatite microtubes and chitosan composite scaffold (HMTs-CHS) on bone regeneration in rat calvarial critical-size defects (CSDs).
methodsHMTs-CHS composites were fabricated through hydrothermal synthesis and atmospheric pressure sintering. The scaffolds were analyzed using SEM, XRD, and FTIR to verify their structural and chemical characteristics. In vitro studies assessed cell proliferation, cytotoxicity, and osteogenic differentiation using bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells (BMSCs). For in vivo evaluation, 24 rats with 8-mm critical-size calvarial defects were divided into three groups: blank, CHS, and HMTs-CHS. Bone regeneration was evaluated at 30 and 60 days using micro-CT and histological analysis.
resultsThe HMTs-CHS scaffold exhibited a well-organized honeycomb-like structure with optimal pore size distribution (100-160 μm). The scaffold significantly enhanced BMSC proliferation and osteogenic differentiation, with increased EdU-positive cells, elevated ALP activity, and enhanced matrix mineralization. Osteogenic markers (RUNX2, COL1, OPN, OCN, BSP) were significantly upregulated in the HMTs-CHS group at both gene and protein levels. In vivo, the HMTs-CHS group showed superior bone regeneration with higher bone volume fraction (BV/TV: 14.07 ± 0.84% at 60 days, representing a - 44% relative improvement over the CHS group at 9.74 ± 1.36%) and better trabecular architecture (p < 0.05). Histological examination confirmed enhanced bone formation and maturation.
conclusionsThe HMTs-CHS composite significantly improved bone regeneration in CSDs compared to CHS alone or no treatment. These findings suggest HMTs-CHS could be a promising biomaterial for treating cranial bone defects, offering an alternative to traditional bone grafts.
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.