MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Bioengineering Human Upper Respiratory Mucosa: A Systematic Review of the State of the Art of Cell Culture Techniques

2024· review· en· W4401585443 on OpenAlex
Davaine Joel Ndongo Sonfack, Clémence Tanguay Boivin, Lydia Touzel Deschênes, Thibault Maurand, Célina Maguemoun, François Berthod, François Gros‐Louis, Pierre‐Olivier Champagne

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueBioengineering · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTracheal and airway disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsCell cultureRespiratory MucosaState of artRespiratory systemState (computer science)Computational biologyMedicineComputer scienceBiologyInternal medicineData science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The upper respiratory mucosa plays a crucial role in both the physical integrity and immunological function of the respiratory tract. However, in certain situations such as infections, trauma, or surgery, it might sustain damage. Tissue engineering, a field of regenerative medicine, has found applications in various medical fields including but not limited to plastic surgery, ophthalmology, and urology. However, its application to the respiratory system remains somewhat difficult due to the complex morphology and histology of the upper respiratory tract. To date, a culture protocol for producing a handleable, well-differentiated nasal mucosa has yet to be developed. The objective of this review is to describe the current state of research pertaining to cell culture techniques used for producing autologous healthy human upper respiratory cells and mucosal tissues, as well as describe its clinical applications. METHODS: A search of the relevant literature was carried out with no time restriction across Embase, Cochrane, PubMed, and Medline Ovid databases. Keywords related to "respiratory mucosa" and "culture techniques of the human airway" were the focus of the search strategy for this review. The risk of bias in retained studies was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute's (JBI) critical appraisal tools for qualitative research. A narrative synthesis of our results was then conducted. RESULTS: A total of 33 studies were included in this review, and thirteen of these focused solely on developing a cell culture protocol without further use. The rest of the studies used their own developed protocol for various applications such as cystic fibrosis, pharmacological, and viral research. One study was able to develop a promising model for nasal mucosa that could be employed as a replacement in nasotracheal reconstructive surgery. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review extensively explored the current state of research regarding cell culture techniques for producing tissue-engineered nasal mucosa. Bioengineering the nasal mucosa holds great potential for clinical use. However, further research on mechanical properties is essential, as the comparison of engineered tissues is currently focused on morphology rather than comprehensive mechanical assessments.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.139
Threshold uncertainty score0.866

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.272 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it