Regeneration of skeletal muscle
Cell and Tissue Research, ISSN: 0302-766X, Vol: 347, Issue: 3, Page: 759-774
2012
- 235Citations
- 324Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations235
- Citation Indexes235
- 235
- CrossRef209
- Captures324
- Readers324
- 324
Review Description
Skeletal muscle has a robust capacity for regeneration following injury. However, few if any effective therapeutic options for volumetric muscle loss are available. Autologous muscle grafts or muscle transposition represent possible salvage procedures for the restoration of mass and function but these approaches have limited success and are plagued by associated donor site morbidity. Cell-based therapies are in their infancy and, to date, have largely focused on hereditary disorders such as Duchenne muscular dystrophy. An unequivocal need exists for regenerative medicine strategies that can enhance or induce de novo formation of functional skeletal muscle as a treatment for congenital absence or traumatic loss of tissue. In this review, the three stages of skeletal muscle regeneration and the potential pitfalls in the development of regenerative medicine strategies for the restoration of functional skeletal muscle in situ are discussed. © Springer-Verlag 2011.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84859424965&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00441-011-1185-7; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21667167; http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00441-011-1185-7; https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00441-011-1185-7; https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00441-011-1185-7; http://www.springerlink.com/index/10.1007/s00441-011-1185-7; http://www.springerlink.com/index/pdf/10.1007/s00441-011-1185-7
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know