Tissue engineering and regenerative medicine: recent innovations and the transition to translation
Fisher MB., Mauck RL.
Clinical Trial, published in Tissue Eng Part B Rev (2013) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.
Several human studies show positive signals, while research methods and sample sizes continue to develop.
- 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
- Clinical Trial
- Journal
- Tissue Eng Part B Rev (2013)
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- Europe PMC
- PMID
- 23253031
- PMCID
- PMC3564480
- DOI
- 10.1089/ten.teb.2012.0723
- Citations
- 139
Abstract (original English)
The field of tissue engineering and regenerative medicine (TERM) has exploded in the last decade. In this Year (or so) in Review, we highlight some of the high impact advances within the field over the past several years. Using the past as our guide and starting with an objective premise, we attempt so to identify recent "hot topics" and transformative publications within the field. Through this process, several key themes emerged: (1) tissue engineering: grafts and materials, (2) regenerative medicine: scaffolds and factors that control endogenous tissue formation, (3) clinical trials, and (4) novel cell sources: induced pluripotent stem cells. Within these focus areas, we summarize the highly impactful articles that emerged from our objective analysis and review additional recent publications to augment and expand upon these key themes. Finally, we discuss where the TERM field may be headed and how to monitor such a broad-based and ever-expanding community.
What this study does not prove
- • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
Evidence level
Several human studies show positive signals, while research methods and sample sizes continue to develop.
How we grade evidenceBrowse all related research
Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.