Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37232981›Full record

ReviewGels (Basel, Switzerland)2023

Bone Regeneration Using Mesenchymal Stromal Cells and Biocompatible Scaffolds: A Concise Review of the Current Clinical Trials.

Federica Re, Elisa Borsani, Rita Rezzani, Luciana Sartore, Domenico Russo

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Gels (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
8.9field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Advances in Biomimetic Scaffolds for Hard Tissue Surgery.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Federica ReUnit of Blood Diseases and Cell Therapies, Department of Clinical and Experimental Sciences, University of Brescia, "ASST-Spedali Civili" Hospital of Brescia, 25123 Brescia, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-4219-8695
Elisa BorsaniDivision of Anatomy and Physiopathology, Department of Clinical and Experimental Sciences, University of Brescia, 25123 Brescia, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-9746-0876
Rita RezzaniDivision of Anatomy and Physiopathology, Department of Clinical and Experimental Sciences, University of Brescia, 25123 Brescia, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-7515-5846
Luciana SartoreDepartment of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, Materials Science and Technology Laboratory, University of Brescia, 25123 Brescia, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-0268-6467
Domenico RussoUnit of Blood Diseases and Cell Therapies, Department of Clinical and Experimental Sciences, University of Brescia, "ASST-Spedali Civili" Hospital of Brescia, 25123 Brescia, Italy.
University of Brescia · ITAzienda Socio Sanitaria Territoriale degli Spedali Civili di Brescia · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Bone regenerative medicine is a clinical approach combining live osteoblast progenitors, such as mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs), with a biocompatible scaffold that can integrate into host bone tissue and restore its structural integrity. Over the last few years, many tissue engineering strategies have been developed and thoroughly investigated; however, limited approaches have been translated to clinical application. Consequently, the development and clinical validation of regenerative approaches remain a centerpiece of investigational efforts towards the clinical translation of advanced bioengineered scaffolds. The aim of this review was to identify the latest clinical trials related to the use of scaffolds with or without MSCs to regenerate bone defects. A revision of the literature was performed in PubMed, Embase, and Clinicaltrials.gov from 2018 up to 2023. Nine clinical trials were analyzed according to the inclusion criteria: six presented in the literature and three reported in Clinicaltrials.gov. Data were extracted covering background trial information. Six of the clinical trials added cells to scaffolds, while three used scaffolds alone. The majority of scaffolds were composed of calcium phosphate ceramic alone, such as β-tricalcium phosphate (TCP) (two clinical trials), biphasic calcium phosphate bioceramic granules (three clinical trials), and anorganic bovine bone (two clinical trials), while bone marrow was the primary source of the MSCs (five clinical trials). The MSC expansion was performed in GMP facilities, using human platelet lysate (PL) as a supplement without osteogenic factors. Only one trial reported minor adverse events. Overall, these findings highlight the importance and efficacy of cell-scaffold constructs in regenerative medicine under different conditions. Despite the encouraging clinical results obtained, further studies are needed to assess their clinical efficacy in treating bone diseases to optimize their application.

Indexed as

bone regenerationclinical trialshuman platelet lysatehydrogelsmesenchymal stromal cellsscaffoldstissue regeneration

Identifiers

PMID37232981
PMCPMC10217263
OpenAlexW4378348235

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.