Evolving applications of the egg: chorioallantoic membrane assay and <i>ex vivo</i> organotypic culture of materials for bone tissue engineering
Marshall KM., Kanczler JM., Oreffo RO.
Narrative Review, published in J Tissue Eng (2020) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.
Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.
- Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
- Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
- Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
- Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
- Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.
- Study type
- Narrative Review
- Journal
- J Tissue Eng (2020)
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- Europe PMC
- PMID
- 33194169
- PMCID
- PMC7594486
- DOI
- 10.1177/2041731420942734
- Citations
- 32
Abstract (original English)
The chick chorioallantoic membrane model has been around for over a century, applied in angiogenic, oncology, dental and xenograft research. Despite its often perceived archaic, redolent history, the chorioallantoic membrane assay offers new and exciting opportunities for material and growth factor evaluation in bone tissue engineering. Currently, superior/improved experimental methodology for the chorioallantoic membrane assay are difficult to identify, given an absence of scientific consensus in defining experimental approaches, including timing of inoculation with materials and the analysis of results. In addition, critically, regulatory and welfare issues impact upon experimental designs. Given such disparate points, this review details recent research using the ex vivo chorioallantoic membrane assay and the ex vivo organotypic culture to advance the field of bone tissue engineering, and highlights potential areas of improvement for their application based on recent developments within our group and the tissue engineering field.
What this study does not prove
- • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
- • This is a narrative review: it collects no new patient data and does not systematically appraise evidence quality.
Evidence level
Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.
How we grade evidenceBrowse all related research
Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.