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

A critical review of fibrous polyurethane-based vascular tissue engineering scaffolds

Fathi-Karkan S., Banimohamad-Shotorbani B., Saghati S., Rahbarghazi R., Davaran S.

Narrative Review on Face & Skin, published in J Biol Eng (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
J Biol Eng (2022)
Reported sample size
—
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
35331305
PMCID
PMC8951709
DOI
10.1186/s13036-022-00286-9
Citations
35

Abstract (original English)

Certain polymeric materials such as polyurethanes (PUs) are the most prevalent class of used biomaterials in regenerative medicine and have been widely explored as vascular substitutes in several animal models. It is thought that PU-based biomaterials possess suitable hemo-compatibility with comparable performance related to the normal blood vessels. Despite these advantages, the possibility of thrombus formation and restenosis limits their application as artificial functional vessels. In this regard, various surface modification approaches have been developed to enhance both hemo-compatibility and prolong patency. While critically reviewing the recent advances in vascular tissue engineering, mainly PU grafts, this paper summarizes the application of preferred cell sources to vascular regeneration, physicochemical properties, and some possible degradation mechanisms of PU to provide a more extensive perspective for future research.

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