ArticleBioengineering & translational medicine2026
SHEDs and BMSCs exhibit distinct lineage preferences in HUVECs dynamic spheroid co-cultures: vascular versus osteogenic commitment.
Article in Bioengineering & translational medicine, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Stem cells from human exfoliated deciduous teeth (SHEDs) offer a promising alternative to bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells (BMSCs) for bone tissue engineering due to their accessibility, high proliferative potential, and multipotency. In this study, we compared the osteogenic and angiogenic potential of two mesenchymal stem cells subpopulations, SHEDs and BMSCs, when co-cultured with human umbilical vein endothelial cells (HUVECs) into spheroids over a period of 28 days in porous pullulan/dextran scaffolds loaded with hydroxyapatite (HAp) particles as the sole osteoinductive cue. Spheroids were cultured under static and dynamic conditions, with the latter employing a perfusion flow bioreactor to enhance solute transport and oxygenation. Dynamic culture conditions significantly improved cell viability compared to static culture (85% vs. 54% at Day 28), maintained spheroid integrity, and promoted the expression of angiogenic markers, such as the cluster of differentiation 31 (CD31) and von Willebrand factor (vWF), which under static culture were largely confined to the spheroid periphery. Furthermore, alpha-smooth muscle actin/neural-glial-antigen 2 (αSMA/NG2) and CD31/NG2 colocalization reflected close spatial associations between SHEDs and HUVECs, suggesting a supportive perivascular interaction under dynamic culture. In the presence of HUVECs, we found that HAp particles alone were insufficient to induce robust osteogenic differentiation in SHEDs. Weak alkaline phosphatase activity, minimal osteopontin and osteocalcin expression, and incomplete mineralization were observed under both static and dynamic conditions. In contrast, BMSC/HUVEC spheroids exhibited robust osteogenic differentiation and consistent mineral deposition. These results show intrinsic differences in the behavior of SHEDs and BMSCs when co-cultured with endothelial cells; while BMSCs tend to favor osteogenesis, SHEDs appear to adopt a more perivascular or pericytic behavior.
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.