Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesNarrative ReviewPubMed

Tissue engineering strategies for promoting vascularized bone regeneration.

Almubarak S., Nethercott H., Freeberg M., Beaudon C., Jha A., Jackson W.

Narrative Review on Cartilage Damage, published in Bone (2015) — 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
Bone (2015)
Country
United States
Reported sample size
—
Source database
PubMed
PMID
26608518
PMCID
PMC4911893
DOI
10.1016/j.bone.2015.11.011
Citations
146

Abstract (original English)

This review focuses on current tissue engineering strategies for promoting vascularized bone regeneration. We review the role of angiogenic growth factors in promoting vascularized bone regeneration and discuss the different therapeutic strategies for controlled/sustained growth factor delivery. Next, we address the therapeutic uses of stem cells in vascularized bone regeneration. Specifically, this review addresses the concept of co-culture using osteogenic and vasculogenic stem cells, and how adipose derived stem cells compare to bone marrow derived mesenchymal stem cells in the promotion of angiogenesis. We conclude this review with a discussion of a novel approach to bone regeneration through a cartilage intermediate, and discuss why it has the potential to be more effective than traditional bone grafting methods.

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
AnimalsBone RegenerationClinical Trials as TopicHumansIntercellular Signaling Peptides and ProteinsNeovascularization, PhysiologicStem CellsTissue Engineering

Browse all related research

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

Related research