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

The potential impact of bone tissue engineering in the clinic

Mishra R., Bishop T., Valerio IL., Fisher JP., Dean D.

Narrative Review, published in Regen Med (2016) — 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
Regen Med (2016)
Reported sample size
—
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
27549369
PMCID
PMC5007661
DOI
10.2217/rme-2016-0042
Citations
41

Abstract (original English)

Bone tissue engineering (BTE) intends to restore structural support for movement and mineral homeostasis, and assist in hematopoiesis and the protective functions of bone in traumatic, degenerative, cancer, or congenital malformation. While much effort has been put into BTE, very little of this research has been translated to the clinic. In this review, we discuss current regenerative medicine and restorative strategies that utilize tissue engineering approaches to address bone defects within a clinical setting. These approaches involve the primary components of tissue engineering: cells, growth factors and biomaterials discussed briefly in light of their clinical relevance. This review also presents upcoming advanced approaches for BTE applications and suggests a probable workpath for translation from the laboratory to the clinic.

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
Bone and BonesAnimalsHumansBone DiseasesTissue EngineeringBone Regeneration

Browse all related research

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