↓ Skip to main content

Changing Paradigms in Cranio-Facial Regeneration: Current and New Strategies for the Activation of Endogenous Stem Cells

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Physiology, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
64 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
Changing Paradigms in Cranio-Facial Regeneration: Current and New Strategies for the Activation of Endogenous Stem Cells
Published in
Frontiers in Physiology, February 2016
DOI 10.3389/fphys.2016.00062
Pubmed ID
Authors

Luigi Mele, Pietro Paolo Vitiello, Virginia Tirino, Francesca Paino, Alfredo De Rosa, Davide Liccardo, Gianpaolo Papaccio, Vincenzo Desiderio

Abstract

Craniofacial area represent a unique district of human body characterized by a very high complexity of tissues, innervation and vascularization, and being deputed to many fundamental function such as eating, speech, expression of emotions, delivery of sensations such as taste, sight, and earing. For this reasons, tissue loss in this area following trauma or for example oncologic resection, have a tremendous impact on patients' quality of life. In the last 20 years regenerative medicine has emerged as one of the most promising approach to solve problem related to trauma, tissue loss, organ failure etc. One of the most powerful tools to be used for tissue regeneration is represented by stem cells, which have been successfully implanted in different tissue/organs with exciting results. Nevertheless, both autologous and allogeneic stem cell transplantation raise many practical and ethical concerns that make this approach very difficult to apply in clinical practice. For this reason different cell free approaches have been developed aiming to the mobilization, recruitment, and activation of endogenous stem cells into the injury site avoiding exogenous cells implant but instead stimulating patients' own stem cells to repair the lesion. To this aim many strategies have been used including functionalized bioscaffold, controlled release of stem cell chemoattractants, growth factors, BMPs, Platelet-Rich-Plasma, and other new strategies such as ultrasound wave and laser are just being proposed. Here we review all the current and new strategies used for activation and mobilization of endogenous stem cells in the regeneration of craniofacial tissue.

X Demographics

X Demographics

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

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 64 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
China 1 2%
Unknown 63 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 16%
Researcher 7 11%
Student > Bachelor 6 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 9%
Other 14 22%
Unknown 10 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 26 41%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 9%
Materials Science 3 5%
Engineering 3 5%
Other 9 14%
Unknown 11 17%
Attention Score in Context

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 25 December 2016.
All research outputs
#18,443,697
of 22,851,489 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#8,150
of 13,641 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#216,988
of 298,866 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#98
of 138 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,851,489 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,641 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% 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 298,866 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 138 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.