Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesNarrative ReviewEurope PMC

Polypyrrole-Incorporated Conducting Constructs for Tissue Engineering Applications: A Review

Liang Y., Goh JC.

Narrative Review on Systemic / IV, published in Bioelectricity (2020) — 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
Bioelectricity (2020)
Reported sample size
—
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
34471842
PMCID
PMC8370322
DOI
10.1089/bioe.2020.0010
Citations
55

Abstract (original English)

Conductive polymers have recently attracted interest in biomedical applications because of their excellent intrinsic electrical conductivity and satisfactory biocompatibility. Polypyrrole (PPy) is one of the most popular among these conductive polymers due to its high conductivity under physiological conditions, and it can be chemically modified to allow biomolecules conjugation. PPy has been used in fabricating biocompatible stimulus-responsive scaffolds for tissue engineering applications, especially for repair and regeneration of electroactive tissues, such as the bone, neuron, and heart. This review provides a comprehensive overview of the basic properties and synthesis methods of PPy, as well as a summary of the materials that have been integrated with PPy. These composite scaffolds are comparatively evaluated with regard to their mechanical properties, biocompatibility, and usage in tissue engineering.

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