ReviewBioMed research international2020
3D Printing Decellularized Extracellular Matrix to Design Biomimetic Scaffolds for Skeletal Muscle Tissue Engineering.
Review in BioMed research international, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 38 citations in OpenAlex.
- Biomimetic Strategies for Bone Regeneration: Smart Scaffolds and Multiscale Cues.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Nanotherapeutic and Nano-Bio Interface for Regeneration and Healing.Biomedicines · 2024Review
- Article
- Extracellular matrix-derived materials for tissue engineering and regenerative medicine: A journey from isolation to characterization and application.Bioactive materials · 2024Review
- The trend of allogeneic tendon decellularization: literature review.Cell and tissue banking · 2024Review
- Decellularized extracellular matrix biomaterials for regenerative therapies: Advances, challenges and clinical prospects.Bioactive materials · 2024Review
- Decellularised extracellular matrix-based injectable hydrogels for tissue engineering applications.Biomaterials translational · 2024Review
- Tissue engineering modalities in skeletal muscles: focus on angiogenesis and immunomodulation properties.Stem cell research & therapy · 2023Review
- Decellularized Extracellular Matrix-Based Bioinks for Tendon Regeneration in Three-Dimensional Bioprinting.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Review
- Additively manufactured metallic biomaterials.Bioactive materials · 2022Review
- Biomaterials for Regenerative Medicine in Italy: Brief State of the Art of the Principal Research Centers.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Review
- Application of 3D Bioprinting in Urology.Micromachines · 2022Review
- Bone Tissue Engineering through 3D Bioprinting of Bioceramic Scaffolds: A Review and Update.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Hybprinting for musculoskeletal tissue engineering.iScience · 2022Review
- Key concepts in muscle regeneration: muscle "cellular ecology" integrates a gestalt of cellular cross-talk, motility, and activity to remodel structure and restore function.European journal of applied physiology · 2022Review
- Advanced Nanofiber-Based Scaffolds for Achilles Tendon Regenerative Engineering.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2022Review
- Tissue-Specific Decellularized Extracellular Matrix Bioinks for Musculoskeletal Tissue Regeneration and Modeling Using 3D Bioprinting Technology.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Functional engineered muscles are still a critical clinical issue to be addressed, although different strategies have been considered so far for the treatment of severe muscular injuries. Indeed, the regenerative capacity of skeletal muscle (SM) results inadequate for large-scale defects, and currently, SM reconstruction remains a complex and unsolved task. For this aim, tissue engineered muscles should provide a proper biomimetic extracellular matrix (ECM) alternative, characterized by an aligned/microtopographical structure and a myogenic microenvironment, in order to promote muscle regeneration. As a consequence, both materials and fabrication techniques play a key role to plan an effective therapeutic approach. Tissue-specific decellularized ECM (dECM) seems to be one of the most promising material to support muscle regeneration and repair. 3D printing technologies, on the other side, enable the fabrication of scaffolds with a fine and detailed microarchitecture and patient-specific implants with high structural complexity. To identify innovative biomimetic solutions to develop engineered muscular constructs for the treatment of SM loss, the more recent (last 5 years) reports focused on SM dECM-based scaffolds and 3D printing technologies for SM regeneration are herein reviewed. Possible design inputs for 3D printed SM dECM-based scaffolds for muscular regeneration are also suggested.
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.