ReviewRegenerative medicine2016
Recreating composition, structure, functionalities of tissues at nanoscale for regenerative medicine.
Review in Regenerative medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Review of clinical experience on biomaterials and tissue engineering of urinary bladder.World journal of urology · 2020Pooled it
- Innovative Nanotechnological Approaches in Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery: A Comprehensive Review.Cureus · 2024Review
- CaBioactive materials · 2021Article
- Engineering (Bio)Materials through Shrinkage and Expansion.Advanced healthcare materials · 2021Review
- Natural-Based Hydrogels for Tissue Engineering Applications.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Review
- Careers in nanomedicine and drug delivery.Advanced drug delivery reviews · 2019Review
- Mapping of the available standards against the regulatory needs for nanomedicines.Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Nanomedicine and nanobiotechnology · 2019Review
- Engineering vascularized and innervated bone biomaterials for improved skeletal tissue regeneration.Materials today (Kidlington, England) · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Nanotechnology offers significant potential in regenerative medicine, specifically with the ability to mimic tissue architecture at the nanoscale. In this perspective, we highlight key achievements in the nanotechnology field for successfully mimicking the composition and structure of different tissues, and the development of bio-inspired nanotechnologies and functional nanomaterials to improve tissue regeneration. Numerous nanomaterials fabricated by electrospinning, nanolithography and self-assembly have been successfully applied to regenerate bone, cartilage, muscle, blood vessel, heart and bladder tissue. We also discuss nanotechnology-based regenerative medicine products in the clinic for tissue engineering applications, although so far most of them are focused on bone implants and fillers. We believe that recent advances in nanotechnologies will enable new applications for tissue regeneration in the near future.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.