ArticleJournal of functional biomaterials2026
In Vitro and In Ovo CAM Model Evaluation of Periosteum-Derived Micrografts.
Article in Journal of functional biomaterials, 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Despite advances in periodontal regenerative therapies, consistent tissue regeneration remains challenging, with cells playing an essential role in successful repair. Therefore, this study tested different dental bone substitutes embedded in the chorioallantoic membrane (CAM) combined with periosteum-derived micrografts obtained using a chair-side device (Rigenera HBW system). Cell populations within the micrografts were identified and characterised via immunofluorescence and flow cytometry (CD31, CD105, CD34, CD90, CD73, and CD45). A CAM model was employed to examine the angiogenic potential of micrografts combined with bone substitutes, which were analysed through quantitative blood vessel/vascularisation assessments using the Ikosa software (2025), along with histological and immunohistochemical evaluations such as smooth muscle actin (SMA), H&E, and Masson's trichrome staining. Statistical analysis was performed using GraphPad Prism 10. The addition of periosteum-derived micrografts resulted in angiogenic enhancement compared to the controls. Notable enhancement of total vessel area, total length, and branching points were obtained when Fisiograft
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.