The Diamond Concept Enigma: Recent Trends of Its Implementation in Cross-linked Chitosan-Based Scaffolds for Bone Tissue Engineering
Agnes CJ., Karoichan A., Tabrizian M.
Narrative Review, published in ACS Appl Bio Mater (2023) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.
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
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
- ACS Appl Bio Mater (2023)
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- Europe PMC
- PMID
- 37310896
- PMCID
- PMC10354806
- DOI
- 10.1021/acsabm.3c00108
- Citations
- 8
Abstract (original English)
An increasing number of publications over the past ten years have focused on the development of chitosan-based cross-linked scaffolds to regenerate bone tissue. The design of biomaterials for bone tissue engineering applications relies heavily on the ideals set forth by a polytherapy approach called the "Diamond Concept". This methodology takes into consideration the mechanical environment, scaffold properties, osteogenic and angiogenic potential of cells, and benefits of osteoinductive mediator encapsulation. The following review presents a comprehensive summarization of recent trends in chitosan-based cross-linked scaffold development within the scope of the Diamond Concept, particularly for nonload-bearing bone repair. A standardized methodology for material characterization, along with assessment of in vitro and in vivo potential for bone regeneration, is presented based on approaches in the literature, and future directions of the field are discussed.
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 evidenceBrowse all related research
Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.