↓ Skip to main content

Evaluation of Cartilage Repair by Mesenchymal Stem Cells Seeded on a PEOT/PBT Scaffold in an Osteochondral Defect

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Biomedical Engineering, January 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Readers on

mendeley
45 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Evaluation of Cartilage Repair by Mesenchymal Stem Cells Seeded on a PEOT/PBT Scaffold in an Osteochondral Defect
Published in
Annals of Biomedical Engineering, January 2015
DOI 10.1007/s10439-015-1246-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

V. Barron, K. Merghani, G. Shaw, C. M. Coleman, J. S. Hayes, S. Ansboro, A. Manian, G. O’Malley, E. Connolly, A. Nandakumar, C. A. van Blitterswijk, P. Habibovic, L. Moroni, F. Shannon, J. M. Murphy, F. Barry

Abstract

The main objective of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a mesenchymal stem cell (MSC)-seeded polyethylene-oxide-terephthalate/polybutylene-terephthalate (PEOT/PBT) scaffold for cartilage tissue repair in an osteochondral defect using a rabbit model. Material characterisation using scanning electron microscopy indicated that the scaffold had a 3D architecture characteristic of the additive manufacturing fabrication method, with a strut diameter of 296 ± 52 μm and a pore size of 512 ± 22 μm × 476 ± 25 μm × 180 ± 30 μm. In vitro optimisation revealed that the scaffold did not generate an adverse cell response, optimal cell loading conditions were achieved using 50 μg/ml fibronectin and a cell seeding density of 25 × 10(6) cells/ml and glycosaminoglycan (GAG) accumulation after 28 days culture in the presence of TGFβ3 indicated positive chondrogenesis. Cell-seeded scaffolds were implanted in osteochondral defects for 12 weeks, with cell-free scaffolds and empty defects employed as controls. On examination of toluidine blue staining for chondrogenesis and GAG accumulation, both the empty defect and the cell-seeded scaffold appeared to promote repair. However, the empty defect and the cell-free scaffold stained positive for collagen type I or fibrocartilage, while the cell-seeded scaffold stained positive for collagen type II indicative of hyaline cartilage and was statistically better than the cell-free scaffold in the blinded histological evaluation. In summary, MSCs in combination with a 3D PEOT/PBT scaffold created a reparative environment for cartilage repair.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 2%
Portugal 1 2%
Unknown 43 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 29%
Researcher 7 16%
Student > Master 5 11%
Student > Bachelor 5 11%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 3 7%
Other 7 16%
Unknown 5 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 24%
Engineering 7 16%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 9%
Materials Science 3 7%
Other 6 13%
Unknown 8 18%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 January 2015.
All research outputs
#10,979,743
of 12,356,791 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Biomedical Engineering
#1,102
of 1,206 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#215,680
of 264,959 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Biomedical Engineering
#26
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,356,791 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,206 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.2. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 264,959 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.