ReviewBrain research bulletin2019
A roadmap for promoting endogenous in situ tissue restoration using inductive bioscaffolds after acute brain injury.
Review in Brain research bulletin, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 33 citations in OpenAlex.
- Translational Considerations for Injectable Biomaterials and Bioscaffolds to Repair and Regenerate Brain Tissue.Advanced healthcare materials · 2026Review
- Impact of the Chronic Ischemic Stroke Microenvironment on Silk Fibroin Hydrogel Biodegradation andACS omega · 2026Article
- Hepatic Extracellular Matrix and Its Role in the Regulation of Liver Phenotype.Seminars in liver disease · 2024Review
- In vitro dose-dependent effects of matrix metalloproteinases on ECM hydrogel biodegradation.Acta biomaterialia · 2024Article
- Engineered Basic Fibroblast Growth Factor Specifically Bonded with Injectable Extracellular Matrix Hydrogel for the Functional Restoration of Cerebral Ischemia in Rats.Biomaterials research · 2024Article
- Decellularized extracellular matrix scaffolds: Recent trends and emerging strategies in tissue engineering.Bioactive materials · 2022Review
- A MinireviewFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2022Review
- Injectable biomaterial shuttles for cell therapy in stroke.Brain research bulletin · 2021Review
- Regenerative Potential of Hydrogels for Intracerebral Hemorrhage: Lessons from Ischemic Stroke and Traumatic Brain Injury Research.Advanced healthcare materials · 2021Article
- Engineered glycomaterial implants orchestrate large-scale functional repair of brain tissue chronically after severe traumatic brain injury.Science advances · 2021Article
- Neuro-regenerative imidazole-functionalized GelMA hydrogel loaded with hAMSC and SDF-1α promote stem cell differentiation and repair focal brain injury.Bioactive materials · 2021Article
- Roadmap for Stroke: Challenging the Role of the Neuronal Extracellular Matrix.International journal of molecular sciences · 2020Review
- Neurorestoration Approach by Biomaterials in Ischemic Stroke.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2020Review
- Bioscaffold-Induced Brain Tissue Regeneration.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The regeneration of brain tissue remains one of the greatest unsolved challenges in medicine and by many is considered unfeasible. Indeed, the adult mammalian brain does not regenerate tissue, but there is ongoing endogenous neurogenesis, which is upregulated after injury and contributes to tissue repair. This endogenous repair response is a conditio sine que non for tissue regeneration. However, scarring around the lesion core and cavitation provide unfavorable conditions for tissue regeneration in the brain. Based on the success of using extracellular matrix (ECM)-based bioscaffolds in peripheral soft tissue regeneration, it is plausible that the provision of an inductive ECM-based hydrogel inside the volumetric tissue loss can attract neural cells and create a de novo viable tissue. Following perturbation theory of these successes in peripheral tissues, we here propose 9 perturbation parts (i.e. requirements) that can be solved independently to create an integrated series to build a functional and integrated de novo neural tissue. Necessities for tissue formation, anatomical and functional connectivity are further discussed to provide a new substrate to support the improvement of behavioral impairments after acute brain injury. We also consider potential parallel developments of this tissue engineering effort that can support therapeutic benefits in the absence of de novo tissue formation (e.g. structural support to veterate brain tissue). It is envisaged that eventually top-down inductive "natural" bioscaffolds composed of decellularized tissues (i.e. ECM) will be replaced by bottom-up synthetic designer hydrogels that will provide very defined structural and signaling properties, potentially even opening up opportunities we currently do not envisage using natural materials.
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.