A Review of the Application of Natural and Synthetic Scaffolds in Bone Regeneration
Wong SK., Yee MMF., Chin KY., Ima-Nirwana S.
Narrative Review, published in J Funct Biomater (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
- J Funct Biomater (2023)
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- Europe PMC
- PMID
- 37233395
- PMCID
- PMC10218951
- DOI
- 10.3390/jfb14050286
- Citations
- 38
Abstract (original English)
The management of bone defects is complicated by the presence of clinical conditions, such as critical-sized defects created by high-energy trauma, tumour resection, infection, and skeletal abnormalities, whereby the bone regeneration capacity is compromised. A bone scaffold is a three-dimensional structure matrix serving as a template to be implanted into the defects to promote vascularisation, growth factor recruitment, osteogenesis, osteoconduction, and mechanical support. This review aims to summarise the types and applications of natural and synthetic scaffolds currently adopted in bone tissue engineering. The merits and caveats of natural and synthetic scaffolds will be discussed. A naturally derived bone scaffold offers a microenvironment closer to in vivo conditions after decellularisation and demineralisation, exhibiting excellent bioactivity, biocompatibility, and osteogenic properties. Meanwhile, an artificially produced bone scaffold allows for scalability and consistency with minimal risk of disease transmission. The combination of different materials to form scaffolds, along with bone cell seeding, biochemical cue incorporation, and bioactive molecule functionalisation, can provide additional or improved scaffold properties, allowing for a faster bone repair rate in bone injuries. This is the direction for future research in the field of bone growth and repair.
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.