ReviewInternational journal of molecular sciences2021
Possible Treatment of Myocardial Infarct Based on Tissue Engineering Using a Cellularized Solid Collagen Scaffold Functionalized with Arg-Glyc-Asp (RGD) Peptide.
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 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Versatile hiPSC Models and Bioengineering Platforms for Investigation of Atrial Fibrosis and Fibrillation.Cells · 2026Review
- Gene- and cell-based therapy in cardiovascular diseases.Journal of cardiovascular pharmacology · 2025Article
- Recent advances in surface functionalization of cardiovascular stents.Bioactive materials · 2025Review
- Therapeutic Potential of Nanocarrier Mediated Delivery of Peptides for Wound Healing: Current Status, Challenges and Future Prospective.AAPS PharmSciTech · 2024Review
- Cryopreservation of Cell Sheets for Regenerative Therapy: Application of Vitrified Hydrogel Membranes.Gels (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Advances in the design, generation, and application of tissue-engineered myocardial equivalents.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Currently, the clinical impact of cell therapy after a myocardial infarction (MI) is limited by low cell engraftment due to low cell retention, cell death in inflammatory and poor angiogenic infarcted areas, secondary migration. Cells interact with their microenvironment through integrin mechanoreceptors that control their survival/apoptosis/differentiation/migration and proliferation. The association of cells with a three-dimensional material may be a way to improve interactions with their integrins, and thus outcomes, especially if preparations are epicardially applied. In this review, we will focus on the rationale for using collagen as a polymer backbone for tissue engineering of a contractile tissue. Contractilities are reported for natural but not synthetic polymers and for naturals only for: collagen/gelatin/decellularized-tissue/fibrin/Matrigel™ and for different material states: hydrogels/gels/solids. To achieve a thick/long-term contractile tissue and for cell transfer, solid porous compliant scaffolds are superior to hydrogels or gels. Classical methods to produce solid scaffolds: electrospinning/freeze-drying/3D-printing/solvent-casting and methods to reinforce and/or maintain scaffold properties by reticulations are reported. We also highlight the possibility of improving integrin interaction between cells and their associated collagen by its functionalizing with the RGD-peptide. Using a contractile patch that can be applied epicardially may be a way of improving ventricular remodeling and limiting secondary cell migration.
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.