Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34768972›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of molecular sciences2021

Conductive Polymeric-Based Electroactive Scaffolds for Tissue Engineering Applications: Current Progress and Challenges from Biomaterials and Manufacturing Perspectives.

Maradhana Agung Marsudi, Ridhola Tri Ariski, Arie Wibowo, Glen Cooper, Anggraini Barlian, Riska Rachmantyo, Paulo J D S Bartolo

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of molecular sciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing 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

26 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Bioresorbable Materials for Wound Management.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Electroactive Polymers for On-Demand Drug Release.Advanced healthcare materials · 2024
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article
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

7 authors.

Maradhana Agung MarsudiMaterials Science and Engineering Research Group, Faculty of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Institut Teknologi Bandung, Jl. Ganesha 10, Bandung 40132, West Java, Indonesia.ORCID 0000-0003-0741-9683
Ridhola Tri AriskiMaterials Science and Engineering Research Group, Faculty of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Institut Teknologi Bandung, Jl. Ganesha 10, Bandung 40132, West Java, Indonesia.
Arie WibowoMaterials Science and Engineering Research Group, Faculty of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Institut Teknologi Bandung, Jl. Ganesha 10, Bandung 40132, West Java, Indonesia.
Glen CooperDepartment of Mechanical, Aerospace, and Civil Engineering, University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PL, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-9568-8973
Anggraini BarlianSchool of Life Science & Technology, Institut Teknologi Bandung, Jl. Ganesha 10, Bandung 40132, West Java, Indonesia.
Riska RachmantyoMaterials Science and Engineering Research Group, Faculty of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Institut Teknologi Bandung, Jl. Ganesha 10, Bandung 40132, West Java, Indonesia.
Paulo J D S BartoloDepartment of Mechanical, Aerospace, and Civil Engineering, University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PL, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3683-726X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The practice of combining external stimulation therapy alongside stimuli-responsive bio-scaffolds has shown massive potential for tissue engineering applications. One promising example is the combination of electrical stimulation (ES) and electroactive scaffolds because ES could enhance cell adhesion and proliferation as well as modulating cellular specialization. Even though electroactive scaffolds have the potential to revolutionize the field of tissue engineering due to their ability to distribute ES directly to the target tissues, the development of effective electroactive scaffolds with specific properties remains a major issue in their practical uses. Conductive polymers (CPs) offer ease of modification that allows for tailoring the scaffold's various properties, making them an attractive option for conductive component in electroactive scaffolds. This review provides an up-to-date narrative of the progress of CPs-based electroactive scaffolds and the challenge of their use in various tissue engineering applications from biomaterials perspectives. The general issues with CP-based scaffolds relevant to its application as electroactive scaffolds were discussed, followed by a more specific discussion in their applications for specific tissues, including bone, nerve, skin, skeletal muscle and cardiac muscle scaffolds. Furthermore, this review also highlighted the importance of the manufacturing process relative to the scaffold's performance, with particular emphasis on additive manufacturing, and various strategies to overcome the CPs' limitations in the development of electroactive scaffolds.

Indexed as

Absorbable ImplantsBiocompatible MaterialsBiomechanical PhenomenaCell AdhesionCell ProliferationElectric ConductivityElectric Stimulation TherapyHumansHydrophobic and Hydrophilic InteractionsMaterials TestingOrgan SpecificityPolymersPrinting, Three-DimensionalTissue EngineeringTissue ScaffoldsBiocompatible MaterialsPolymersadditive manufacturingbonecardiacconductive polymerselectroactive scaffoldmusclenerveskintissue engineering

Identifiers

PMID34768972
PMCPMC8584045

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.