ArticleRestorative dentistry & endodontics2026
Initial attachment, viability, proliferation, and migration of osteoblast-like SaOS-2 cells on two resorbable xenogeneic membranes for guided tissue regeneration: ab in vitro experimental study.
Article in Restorative dentistry & endodontics, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: This study evaluated the biocompatibility of a new xenogeneic resorbable membrane derived from porcine esophagus membrane (Quirumatrix, Cells Tech Co.) and compared it with a porcine pericardium membrane (Straumann Jason, Straumann Holding AG.) traditionally used for guided tissue regeneration. The parameters investigated were the viability, migration, and adhesion of SaOS-2 osteoblast-like cells derived from osteosarcoma on both membranes. Methods: The cells were cultured in 100 mm plates in RPMI 1640 medium (40 mL), supplemented. They were incubated at 37°C in a humidified atmosphere with 95% air and 5% to 10% CO2. Cell morphology and adhesion were evaluated using phase contrast optical microscopy and scanning electron microscope. Cell viability and proliferation were evaluated using a fluorometric resazurin reduction assay, with fluorescence intensity measured at 48, 72, and 96 hours. Cell migration was evaluated using staining with Alexa Fluor 555 Phalloidin (Cell Signaling Technology) and DAPI, with a reference line. Cell migration was analyzed by measuring displacement within the delineated area using an Axio Imager M2 fluorescence microscope (Carl Zeiss). Each membrane was photographed. The statistical analysis was performed using GraphPad Prism ver. 10.2.3 (GraphPad Software). A p-value <0.05 was considered significant between experimental groups. Results: Both membranes were shown to be biocompatible. The porcine pericardium membrane showed greater cell adhesion and proliferation compared to the porcine esophagus membrane. Cell migration was significantly greater in the Jason membrane. Conclusions: The results revealed that both evaluated membranes are biocompatible and non-cytotoxic; further research is needed to understand their long-term behavior, interactions with other types of cells, and performance in specific therapeutic situations.
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.