Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33363127›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2020

Building Scaffolds for Tubular Tissue Engineering.

Alexander J Boys, Sarah L Barron, Damyan Tilev, Roisin M Owens

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Bioengineered Bile Duct for Liver Regenerative Medicine and Bile Duct Reconstruction.JGH open : an open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2025
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Tissue Engineering for Gastrointestinal and Genitourinary Tracts.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Recent Advances in Senotherapeutics Delivery.Tissue engineering. Part B, Reviews · 2022
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Alexander J BoysDepartment of Chemical Engineering and Biotechnology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Sarah L BarronDepartment of Chemical Engineering and Biotechnology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Damyan TilevDepartment of Chemical Engineering and Biotechnology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Roisin M OwensDepartment of Chemical Engineering and Biotechnology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Hollow organs and tissue systems drive various functions in the body. Many of these hollow or tubular systems, such as vasculature, the intestines, and the trachea, are common targets for tissue engineering, given their relevance to numerous diseases and body functions. As the field of tissue engineering has developed, numerous benchtop models have been produced as platforms for basic science and drug testing. Production of tubular scaffolds for different tissue engineering applications possesses many commonalities, such as the necessity for producing an intact tubular opening and for formation of semi-permeable epithelia or endothelia. As such, the field has converged on a series of manufacturing techniques for producing these structures. In this review, we discuss some of the most common tissue engineered applications within the context of tubular tissues and the methods by which these structures can be produced. We provide an overview of the general structure and anatomy for these tissue systems along with a series of general design criteria for tubular tissue engineering. We categorize methods for manufacturing tubular scaffolds as follows: casting, electrospinning, rolling, 3D printing, and decellularization. We discuss state-of-the-art models within the context of vascular, intestinal, and tracheal tissue engineering. Finally, we conclude with a discussion of the future for these fields.

Indexed as

3D printingbiomaterialsdecellularizationelectrospinningintestinelumentracheavascular

Identifiers

PMID33363127
PMCPMC7758256

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.