Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34722152›Full record

ReviewJournal of orthopaedic translation2021

Osteochondral tissue engineering: Perspectives for clinical application and preclinical development.

Chengchong Ai, Yee Han Dave Lee, Xuan Hao Tan, Si Heng Sharon Tan, James Hoi Po Hui, James Cho-Hong Goh

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of orthopaedic translation, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

30 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Chengchong AiIntegrative Sciences and Engineering Programme, NUS Graduate School, National University of Singapore, Singapore.
Yee Han Dave LeeDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, National University Health System, Singapore.
Xuan Hao TanIntegrative Sciences and Engineering Programme, NUS Graduate School, National University of Singapore, Singapore.
Si Heng Sharon TanDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, National University Health System, Singapore.
James Hoi Po HuiDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, National University Health System, Singapore.
James Cho-Hong GohIntegrative Sciences and Engineering Programme, NUS Graduate School, National University of Singapore, Singapore.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The treatment of osteochondral defects (OCD) remains challenging. Among currently available surgical treatments for OCDs, scaffold-based treatments are promising to regenerate the osteochondral unit. However, there is still no consensus regarding the clinical effectiveness of these scaffold-based therapies for OCDs. Previous reviews have described the gradient physiological characteristics of osteochondral tissue and gradient scaffold design for OCD, tissue engineering strategies, biomaterials, and fabrication technologies. However, the discussion on bridging the gap between the clinical need and preclinical research is still limited, on which we focus in the present review, providing an insight into what is currently lacking in tissue engineering methods that failed to yield satisfactory outcomes, and what is needed to further improve these techniques. Currently available surgical treatments for OCDs are firstly summarized, followed by a comprehensive review on experimental animal studies in recent 5 years on osteochondral tissue engineering. The review will then conclude with what is currently lacking in these animal studies and the recommendations that would help enlighten the community in developing more clinically relevant implants. THE TRANSLATIONAL POTENTIAL OF THIS ARTICLE: This review is attempting to summarize the lessons from clinical and preclinical failures, providing an insight into what is currently lacking in TE methods that failed to yield satisfactory outcomes, and what is needed to further improve these implants.

Indexed as

Animal experimentOsteochondral regenerationScaffoldSubchondral bone

Identifiers

PMID34722152
PMCPMC8517716

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.