Smart scaffolds in bone tissue engineering: A systematic review of literature

Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.

• 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

Abstract (original English)

Aim To improve osteogenic differentiation and attachment of cells. Methods An electronic search was conducted in PubMed from January 2004 to December 2013. Studies which performed smart modifications on conventional bone scaffold materials were included. Scaffolds with controlled release or encapsulation of bioactive molecules were not included. Experiments which did not investigate response of cells toward the scaffold (cell attachment, proliferation or osteoblastic differentiation) were excluded. Results Among 1458 studies, 38 met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The main scaffold varied extensively among the included studies. Smart modifications included addition of growth factors (group I-11 studies), extracellular matrix-like molecules (group II-13 studies) and nanoparticles (nano-HA) (group III-17 studies). In all groups, surface coating was the most commonly applied approach for smart modification of scaffolds. In group I, bone morphogenetic proteins were mainly used as growth factor stabilized on polycaprolactone (PCL). In group II, collagen 1 in combination with PCL, hydroxyapatite (HA) and tricalcium phosphate were the most frequent scaffolds used. In the third group, nano-HA with PCL and chitosan were used the most. As variable methods were used, a thorough and comprehensible compare between the results and approaches was unattainable. Conclusion Regarding the v

Evidence level

Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.

Browse all related research

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