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

Pre-clinical characterization of tissue engineering constructs for bone and cartilage regeneration

Trachtenberg JE., Vo TN., Mikos AG.

Narrative Review on Cartilage Damage, published in Ann Biomed Eng (2015) — 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
Ann Biomed Eng (2015)
Reported sample size
—
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
25319726
PMCID
PMC4380647
DOI
10.1007/s10439-014-1151-0
Citations
18

Abstract (original English)

Pre-clinical animal models play a crucial role in the translation of biomedical technologies from the bench top to the bedside. However, there is a need for improved techniques to evaluate implanted biomaterials within the host, including consideration of the care and ethics associated with animal studies, as well as the evaluation of host tissue repair in a clinically relevant manner. This review discusses non-invasive, quantitative, and real-time techniques for evaluating host-materials interactions, quality and rate of neotissue formation, and functional outcomes of implanted biomaterials for bone and cartilage tissue engineering. Specifically, a comparison will be presented for pre-clinical animal models, histological scoring systems, and non-invasive imaging modalities. Additionally, novel technologies to track delivered cells and growth factors will be discussed, including methods to directly correlate their release with tissue growth.

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
CartilageBone and BonesAnimalsHumansBiocompatible MaterialsTissue EngineeringProstheses and ImplantsRegeneration

Browse all related research

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

Related research