ArticleJournal of biological engineering2026
Comparison of different decellularization protocols for porcine centrum tendineum diaphragmatis and diaphragmatic muscle - a base for effective recellularization.
Article in Journal of biological engineering, 2026. 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
19 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Diaphragmatic dysfunction results from a variety of diseases or post-surgical conditions, leading to impaired lung function and high morbidity and mortality. Current repair materials are limited by poor biocompatibility, functional incompatibility and immune reactions. Tissue engineering via decellularization offers a promising approach by preserving the extracellular matrix while reducing host immune response. However, most studies have focused on rodent models. This study evaluates three decellularization protocols using porcine tissues to increase clinical relevance and optimize diaphragm repair strategies. We compared detergent-enzymatic treatment (DET) adapted from murine diaphragm developed by Andreas et al. (P1) and two decellularization protocols for larger mammalian diaphragm tissues published by Barbon et al. (P2) for human diaphragm and Deeken et al. (P3) for porcine tendinous diaphragm. Decellularized samples were analyzed using histological analysis, SEM, DNA and GAG quantification and proteomic analysis. DNA content was reduced in decellularized tissues significantly between native and decellularized tissues (native: 990.30 ng/mg (IQR = 556.20); P1: 31.92 ng/mg (IQR = 40.38), P2: 32.38 ng/mg (IQR = 20.83), P3: 106.40 ng/mg (IQR = 811.32). Proteomics revealed 4,640 conserved proteins (5.41% classified as matrisomal proteins). The protocols showed a 55.4% concordance of the preserved matrisomal fraction (n = 139). The highest protein preservation was achieved by P3, followed by P2 and P1. The P1 and P2 protocols are effective in preserving the extracellular matrix while removing cellular components, with no clear preference. Within our laboratory setting, P3 showed decellularization, but did not reach current decellularization standards. This study advances the preparation for clinical translation of a decellularized porcine diaphragm.
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.