Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesAnimal StudyPubMed

An In Vivo Assessment of Different Mesenchymal Stromal Cell Tissue Types and Their Differentiation State on a Shape Memory Polymer Scaffold for Bone Regeneration.

Guda T., Stukel Shah JM., Lundquist BD., Macaitis JM., Pérez ML., Pfau-Cloud MR.

Animal Study on Face & Skin, published in J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater (2024) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesEvidence level of this study

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
Read the A–D evidence level guide

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
Animal Study
Journal
J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater (2024)
Country
United States
Reported sample size
—
Source database
PubMed
PMID
39607370
DOI
10.1002/jbm.b.35516

Abstract (original English)

A combined biomaterial and cell-based solution to heal critical size bone defects in the craniomaxillofacial area is a promising alternative therapeutic option to improve upon autografting, the current gold standard. A shape memory polymer (SMP) scaffold, composed of biodegradable poly(ε-caprolactone) and coated with bioactive polydopamine, was evaluated with mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) derived from adipose (ADSC), bone marrow (BMSC), or umbilical cord (UCSC) tissue in their undifferentiated state or pre-differentiated toward osteoblasts for bone healing in a rat calvarial defect model. Pre-differentiating ADSCs and UCSCs resulted in higher new bone volume fraction (15.69% ± 1.64%) compared to empty (i.e., untreated) defects and scaffold-only (i.e., unseeded) groups (4.41% ± 1.11%). Notably, only differentiated UCSCs exhibited a significant increase in new bone volume, surpassing both undifferentiated UCSCs and unseeded scaffolds. Further, differentiated ADSCs and UCSCs had significantly higher trabecular numbers than their undifferentiated counterparts, unseeded scaffolds, and untreated defects. Although the mineral density regenerated within the unseeded scaffold surpassed that achieved with cell seeding, the connectivity of this bone was diminished, as the regenerated tissue confined itself to the spherical morphology of the scaffold pores. The SMP scaffold alone, with

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
  • • This is preclinical work; animal or laboratory results cannot be applied to humans.

Evidence level

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

How we grade evidence
AnimalsMesenchymal Stem CellsTissue ScaffoldsBone RegenerationRatsCell DifferentiationPolymersPolyestersHumansSkull

Browse all related research

Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.

Related research