Recombinant Proteins-Based Strategies in Bone Tissue Engineering
Paulini M., Camal Ruggieri IN., Ramallo M., Alonso M., Rodriguez-Cabello JC., Esbrit P.
Narrative Review, published in Biomolecules (2021) — 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
- Biomolecules (2021)
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- Europe PMC
- PMID
- 35053152
- PMCID
- PMC8773742
- DOI
- 10.3390/biom12010003
- Citations
- 11
Abstract (original English)
The increase in fracture rates and/or problems associated with missing bones due to accidents or various pathologies generates socio-health problems with a very high impact. Tissue engineering aims to offer some kind of strategy to promote the repair of damaged tissue or its restoration as close as possible to the original tissue. Among the alternatives proposed by this specialty, the development of scaffolds obtained from recombinant proteins is of special importance. Furthermore, science and technology have advanced to obtain recombinant chimera's proteins. This review aims to offer a synthetic description of the latest and most outstanding advances made with these types of scaffolds, particularly emphasizing the main recombinant proteins that can be used to construct scaffolds in their own right, i.e., not only to impregnate them, but also to make scaffolds from their complex structure, with the purpose of being considered in bone regenerative medicine in the near future.
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.