ReviewCurrent stem cell reports2017
Bioengineering Hearts: Simple yet Complex.
Review in Current stem cell reports, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.
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
19 citing papers in PubMed.
- Preclinical extracellular matrix-based treatment strategies for myocardial infarction: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Communications medicine · 2025Article
- Expanding the Donor Pool.Methodist DeBakey cardiovascular journal · 2025Review
- Mitigation of Fibrosis after Myocardial Infarction in Rats by Using a Porcine Cholecyst Extracellular Matrix.Comparative medicine · 2023Article
- Whole-Heart Tissue Engineering and Cardiac Patches: Challenges and Promises.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Mechanical properties of the rabbit and human decellularized patches for well-tolerated/reinforced organ in cardiac tissue engineering.Journal of cardiovascular and thoracic research · 2023Article
- Decellularized Extracellular Matrix Scaffolds for Cardiovascular Tissue Engineering: Current Techniques and Challenges.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Review
- Strategies for Expanding Donors Pool in Heart Transplantation.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Review
- Artificial Scaffolds in Cardiac Tissue Engineering.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Is a Bioengineered Heart From Recipient Tissues the Answer to the Shortage of Donors in Heart Transplantation?Cureus · 2022Review
- Article
- Regenerative Medicine and Angiogenesis; Challenges and Opportunities.Advanced pharmaceutical bulletin · 2020Review
- Young at Heart: Combining Strategies to Rejuvenate Endogenous Mechanisms of Cardiac Repair.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2020Review
- Dental Stem Cell-Derived Secretome/Conditioned Medium: The Future for Regenerative Therapeutic Applications.Stem cells international · 2020Review
- Perspectives on Directions and Priorities for Future Preclinical Studies in Regenerative Medicine.Circulation research · 2019Review
- The Future of Tissue Engineering in Heart Transplantation.Texas Heart Institute journal · 2019Review
- 3D printing approaches for cardiac tissue engineering and role of immune modulation in tissue regeneration.International journal of nanomedicine · 2019Review
- 3D bioprinting for cardiovascular regeneration and pharmacology.Advanced drug delivery reviews · 2018Review
- Decellularized human placenta supports hepatic tissue and allows rescue in acute liver failure.Hepatology (Baltimore, Md.) · 2018Article
- Naturally-Derived Biomaterials for Tissue Engineering Applications.Advances in experimental medicine and biologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose of reviewIn this review, we focus on the multiple advancements in the field of cardiovascular regenerative medicine and the state-of-the art of building a heart. An organ is comprised of cells, but cells alone do not comprise an organ. We summarize the components needed, the hurdles, and likely translational steps defining the opportunities for discovery. RECENT
findingsThe therapies being developed in regenerative medicine aim not only to repair, but also to regenerate or replace ailing tissues and organs. The first generation of cardiac regenerative medicine was gene therapy. The past decade has focused primarily on cell therapy, particularly for repair after ischemic injury with mixed results. Although cell therapy is promising, it will likely never reverse end-stage heart failure; and thus, the unmet need is, and will remain, for organs. Scientists have now tissue engineering and regenerative medicine concepts to invent alternative therapies for a wide spectrum of diseases encompassing cardiovascular, respiratory, gastrointestinal, hepatic, renal, musculoskeletal, ocular, and neurodegenerative disorders. Current studies focus on potential scaffolds and applying concepts and techniques learned with testbeds to building human sized organs. Special focus has been given to scaffold sources, cells types and sources, and cell integration with scaffolds. The complexity arises in combining them to yield an organ. SUMMARY: Regenerative medicine has emerged as one of the most promising fields of translational research and has the potential to minimize both the need for, and increase the availability of, donor organs. The field is characterized by its integration of biology, physical sciences, and engineering. The proper integration of these fields could lead to off-the-shelf bioartificial organs that are suitable for transplantation. Building a heart will necessarily require a scaffold that can provide cardiac function. We believe that the advent of decellularization methods provides complex, unique, and natural scaffold sources. Ultimately, cell biology and tissue engineering will need to synergize with scaffold biology, finding cell sources and reproducible ways to expand their numbers is an unmet need. But tissue engineering is moving toward whole organ synthesis at an unparalleled pace.
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.