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

Clinically relevant preclinical animal models for testing novel cranio-maxillofacial bone 3D-printed biomaterials

Hatt LP., Thompson K., Helms JA., Stoddart MJ., Armiento AR.

Narrative Review on Face & Skin, published in Clin 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
Clin Transl Med (2022)
Reported sample size
—
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
35170248
PMCID
PMC8847734
DOI
10.1002/ctm2.690
Citations
32

Abstract (original English)

Bone tissue engineering is a rapidly developing field with potential for the regeneration of craniomaxillofacial (CMF) bones, with 3D printing being a suitable fabrication tool for patient-specific implants. The CMF region includes a variety of different bones with distinct functions. The clinical implementation of tissue engineering concepts is currently poor, likely due to multiple reasons including the complexity of the CMF anatomy and biology, and the limited relevance of the currently used preclinical models. The 'recapitulation of a human disease' is a core requisite of preclinical animal models, but this aspect is often neglected, with a vast majority of studies failing to identify the specific clinical indication they are targeting and/or the rationale for choosing one animal model over another. Currently, there are no suitable guidelines that propose the most appropriate animal model to address a specific CMF pathology and no standards are established to test the efficacy of biomaterials or tissue engineered constructs in the CMF field. This review reports the current clinical scenario of CMF reconstruction, then discusses the numerous limitations of currently used preclinical animal models employed for validating 3D-printed tissue engineered constructs and the need to reduce animal work that does not address a specific clinical question. We will highlight critical res

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
MandibleAnimalsMaxillofacial InjuriesBiocompatible MaterialsTissue EngineeringModels, AnimalPrinting, Three-DimensionalPlastic Surgery Procedures

Browse all related research

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

Related research