ReviewActa biomaterialia2022
Bringing hydrogel-based craniofacial therapies to the clinic.
Review in Acta biomaterialia, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- A low-cost imaging platform for quantitative characterisation of scaffold surface macrotopography with potential application in craniofacial tissue engineering.Medical & biological engineering & computing · 2026Article
- Engineering function in lung biology: integrating imaging, regenerative constructs, and functional biodesign.American journal of physiology. Lung cellular and molecular physiology · 2026Review
- Bioprinted Constructs in the Regulatory Landscape: Current State and Future Perspectives.Advanced materials (Deerfield Beach, Fla.) · 2026Review
- RADA-16 Reduces Postoperative Epistaxis After Inferior Turbinate Submucosal Resection.The Laryngoscope · 2025Article
- Unveiling aging heterogeneities in human dermal fibroblasts via nanosensor chemical cytometry.Nature communications · 2025Article
- 3D bioprinting for bile duct tissue engineering: current status and prospects.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Review
- A 3D Perfusable Platform for In Vitro Culture of Patient Derived Xenografts.Advanced healthcare materials · 2023Article
- Hydrogels for Oral Tissue Engineering: Challenges and Opportunities.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Recent Advances in Hydrogel-Based Phototherapy for Tumor Treatment.Gels (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Systematic review on the application of 3D-bioprinting technology in orthoregeneration: current achievements and open challenges.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
This review explores the evolution of the use of hydrogels for craniofacial soft tissue engineering, ranging in complexity from acellular injectable fillers to fabricated, cell-laden constructs with complex compositions and architectures. Addressing both in situ and ex vivo approaches, tissue restoration secondary to trauma or tumor resection is discussed. Beginning with relatively simple epithelia of oral mucosa and gingiva, then moving to more functional units like vocal cords or soft tissues with multilayer branched structures, such as salivary glands, various approaches are presented toward the design of function-driven architectures, inspired by native tissue organization. Multiple tissue replacement paradigms are presented here, including the application of hydrogels as structural materials and as delivery platforms for cells and/or therapeutics. A practical hierarchy is proposed for hydrogel systems in craniofacial applications, based on their material and cellular complexity, spatial order, and biological cargo(s). This hierarchy reflects the regulatory complexity dictated by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in the United States prior to commercialization of these systems for use in humans. The wide array of available biofabrication methods, ranging from simple syringe extrusion of a biomaterial to light-based spatial patterning for complex architectures, is considered within the history of FDA-approved commercial therapies. Lastly, the review assesses the impact of these regulatory pathways on the translational potential of promising pre-clinical technologies for craniofacial applications. STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE: While many commercially available hydrogel-based products are in use for the craniofacial region, most are simple formulations that either are applied topically or injected into tissue for aesthetic purposes. The academic literature previews many exciting applications that harness the versatility of hydrogels for craniofacial soft tissue engineering. One of the most exciting developments in the field is the emergence of advanced biofabrication methods to design complex hydrogel systems that can promote the functional or structural repair of tissues. To date, no clinically available hydrogel-based therapy takes full advantage of current pre-clinical advances. This review surveys the increasing complexity of the current landscape of available clinical therapies and presents a framework for future expanded use of hydrogels with an eye toward translatability and U.S. regulatory approval for craniofacial applications.
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.