Level A· Stronger Clinical EvidenceSystematic ReviewEurope PMCOpen access

Current strategies on kidney regeneration using tissue engineering approaches: a systematic review

Torabinavid P., Khosropanah MH., Azimzadeh A., Kajbafzadeh AM.

Systematic Review on Scar, published in BMC Nephrol (2025) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level A· Stronger Clinical EvidenceEvidence level of this study

Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.

  • 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
Systematic Review
Journal
BMC Nephrol (2025)
Reported sample size
—
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
39934739
PMCID
PMC11816546
DOI
10.1186/s12882-025-03968-w
Citations
5

Abstract (original English)

Introduction Over the past two decades, there has been a notable rise in the number of individuals afflicted with End-Stage Renal Disease, resulting in an increased demand for renal replacement therapies. While periodic dialysis is beneficial, it can negatively impact a patient's quality of life and does not fully replicate the secretory functions of the kidneys. Additionally, the scarcity of organ donors and complications associated with organ transplants have underscored the importance of tissue engineering. Regenerative medicine is revolutionized by developing decellularized organs and tissue engineering, which is considered a cutting-edge area of study with enormous potential. Developing bioengineered kidneys using tissue engineering approaches for renal replacement therapy is promising. Method and materials We aimed to systematically review the essential preclinical data to promote the translation of tissue engineering research for kidney repair from the laboratory to clinical practice. A PubMed search strategy was systematically implemented without any linguistic restrictions. The assessment focused on complete circumferential and inlay procedures, thoroughly evaluating parameters such as cell seeding, decellularization techniques, recellularization protocols, and biomaterial types. Results Of the 1,484 studies retrieved from the following primary searches, 105 were inclu

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.

Evidence level

Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.

How we grade evidence
KidneyAnimalsHumansKidney Failure, ChronicRenal Replacement TherapyTissue EngineeringRegenerative MedicineRegenerationTissue Scaffolds

Browse all related research

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

Related research