| Title |
Potential use of mesenchymal stem cells in human meniscal repair: current insights
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Open Access Journal of Sports Medicine, March 2017
|
| DOI | 10.2147/oajsm.s113018 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jaewoo Pak, Jung Hun Lee, Kwang Seung Park, Jeong Ho Jeon, Sang Hee Lee |
| Abstract |
The menisci of the human knee play an important role in maintaining normal functions to provide stability and nutrition to the articular cartilage, and to absorb shock. Once injured, these important structures have very limited natural healing potential. Unfortunately, the traditional arthroscopic meniscectomy performed on these damaged menisci may predispose the joint toward early development of osteoarthritis. Although a very limited number of studies are available, mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) have been investigated as an alternative therapeutic modality to repair human knee meniscal tears. This review summarizes the results of published applications of MSCs in human patients, which showed that the patients who received MSCs (autologous adipose tissue-derived stem cells or culture-expanded bone marrow-derived stem cells) presented symptomatic improvements, along with magnetic resonance imaging evidences of the meniscal repair. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 11% |
| Italy | 1 | 11% |
| Unknown | 7 | 78% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 8 | 89% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 11% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 58 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Doctoral Student | 10 | 17% |
| Researcher | 9 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 12% |
| Other | 5 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 5 | 8% |
| Unknown | 19 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 23 | 39% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 7% |
| Engineering | 4 | 7% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 2 | 3% |
| Unknown | 21 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 29 March 2017.
All research outputs
#5,340,716
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from Open Access Journal of Sports Medicine
#93
of 251 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#87,629
of 324,971 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Open Access Journal of Sports Medicine
#5
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 251 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its peers.
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 324,971 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.