Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesNarrative ReviewEurope PMCOpen access

Advanced strategies to thwart foreign body response to implantable devices

Capuani S., Malgir G., Chua CYX., Grattoni A.

Narrative Review on Immune Modulation, published in Bioeng Transl Med (2022) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesEvidence level of this study

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

  • Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
  • Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
  • Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
  • Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
  • Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
Read the A–D evidence level guide

This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.

Study type
Narrative Review
Journal
Bioeng Transl Med (2022)
Reported sample size
—
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
36176611
PMCID
PMC9472022
DOI
10.1002/btm2.10300
Citations
110

Abstract (original English)

Mitigating the foreign body response (FBR) to implantable medical devices (IMDs) is critical for successful long-term clinical deployment. The FBR is an inevitable immunological reaction to IMDs, resulting in inflammation and subsequent fibrotic encapsulation. Excessive fibrosis may impair IMDs function, eventually necessitating retrieval or replacement for continued therapy. Therefore, understanding the implant design parameters and their degree of influence on FBR is pivotal to effective and long lasting IMDs. This review gives an overview of FBR as well as anti-FBR strategies. Furthermore, we highlight recent advances in biomimetic approaches to resist FBR, focusing on their characteristics and potential biomedical applications.

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
  • • This is a narrative review: it collects no new patient data and does not systematically appraise evidence quality.

Evidence level

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

How we grade evidence

Browse all related research

Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.

Related research