ReviewJournal of biological engineering2026
Therapeutic efficacy of mesenchymal stem cell-derived extracellular vesicles combined with injectable hydrogels in bone defect repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis of preclinical studies.
Review in Journal of biological engineering, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Extracellular Vesicles and Their Role in Osteogenesis.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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCritical-sized bone defects represent a major clinical challenge due to their limited intrinsic regenerative potential and the considerable limitations of existing surgical interventions. In recent years, the integration of mesenchymal stem cell-derived extracellular vesicles (MSCEVs) with injectable hydrogels (IHs) has gained attention as a promising, cell-free regenerative approach. Although each component independently confers therapeutic benefits, their combined efficacy has not yet been thoroughly evaluated.
methodsThis systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted in accordance with PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Relevant studies were identified through comprehensive searches in PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and ProQuest. Standardized mean differences (SMD) were calculated using a random-effects model. Risk of bias was assessed using the SYRCLE tool, and sensitivity analysis, publication bias assessment, and subgroup analyses were conducted.
resultsA quantitative analysis of the included literature revealed that MSCEV-IHs constructs significantly enhanced bone regeneration compared with the control groups, with improved BV/TV at 4 weeks (SMD = 3.52) and 8 weeks (SMD = 6.30), BMD (SMD = 5.45), trabecular number (SMD = 7.52), and thickness (SMD = 6.46). Angiogenesis (SMD = 3.53) and osteogenic markers RUNX2 (SMD = 5.86), BMP2 (SMD = 2.57), OPN (SMD = 7.22), and OCN (SMD = 7.66) were significantly upregulated.
conclusionThe use of MSCEVs in combination with IHs has demonstrated substantial potential to enhance both angiogenesis and osteogenic activity in bone defects. However, the considerable heterogeneity across existing studies presents a major barrier to clinical translation. To advance this strategy toward clinical application, harmonized protocols and standardized methodologies are critically needed for consistent validation and optimization.
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.