TISSUE ENGINEERING IN PLASTIC SURGERY - WHAT HAS BEEN DONE.
Ribeiro J., Pirraco RP., Horta R.
Narrative Review, published in Acta Chir Plast (2020) — 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
- Acta Chir Plast (2020)
- Country
- Czech Republic
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- PubMed
- PMID
- 33685204
Abstract (original English)
The field of tissue engineering applies principles of engineering and life sciences for the development of functional biologic substitutes. The increasing need of tissue for challenging reconstructive surgeries places plastic surgeons involvement as vital in the research and development of engineered constructs and subsequent use. This narrative review aims to summarize tissue engineering principles, to update on its current uses and breakthroughs, to approach its current limitations and possible future directions for this exciting new field of medicine. This revision addressed tissue engineering utilisation in skin lesions, craniocervical defects, musculoskeletal defects, peripheral nerves lesions, vascular tissue defects and adipose tissue uses. Research in tissue engineering is increasing exponentially, however, and although there are already several engineered constructs available, its widespread clinical application is still a hope. More long-term studies that answer outstanding issues are needed in order for that to become reality.
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.