Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesNarrative ReviewEurope PMCOpen access

Tissue engineered scaffolds for an effective healing and regeneration: reviewing orthotopic studies

Baiguera S., Urbani L., Del Gaudio C.

Narrative Review on Chronic Wound, published in Biomed Res Int (2014) — 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
Biomed Res Int (2014)
Reported sample size
—
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
25250319
PMCID
PMC4163448
DOI
10.1155/2014/398069
Citations
24

Abstract (original English)

It is commonly stated that tissue engineering is the most promising approach to treat or replace failing tissues/organs. For this aim, a specific strategy should be planned including proper selection of biomaterials, fabrication techniques, cell lines, and signaling cues. A great effort has been pursued to develop suitable scaffolds for the restoration of a variety of tissues and a huge number of protocols ranging from in vitro to in vivo studies, the latter further differentiating into several procedures depending on the type of implantation (i.e., subcutaneous or orthotopic) and the model adopted (i.e., animal or human), have been developed. All together, the published reports demonstrate that the proposed tissue engineering approaches spread toward multiple directions. The critical review of this scenario might suggest, at the same time, that a limited number of studies gave a real improvement to the field, especially referring to in vivo investigations. In this regard, the present paper aims to review the results of in vivo tissue engineering experimentations, focusing on the role of the scaffold and its specificity with respect to the tissue to be regenerated, in order to verify whether an extracellular matrix-like device, as usually stated, could promote an expected positive outcome.

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
Extracellular MatrixAnimalsHumansGuided Tissue RegenerationTissue EngineeringEquipment DesignRegenerationWound HealingTissue Scaffolds

Browse all related research

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

Related research