Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35331305›Full record

ReviewJournal of biological engineering2022

A critical review of fibrous polyurethane-based vascular tissue engineering scaffolds.

Sonia Fathi-Karkan, Behnaz Banimohamad-Shotorbani, Sepideh Saghati, Reza Rahbarghazi, Soodabeh Davaran

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of biological engineering, 2022. 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. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Collagen-Based Scaffolds for Meniscal Repair and Regeneration.Journal of tissue engineering and regenerative medicine · 2025
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  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

5 authors.

Sonia Fathi-KarkanStudent Research Committee, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran.
Behnaz Banimohamad-ShotorbaniDrug Applied Research Center, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran.
Sepideh SaghatiDepartment of Tissue Engineering, Faculty of Advanced Medical Sciences, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran.
Reza Rahbarghazi *Student Research Committee, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran. rezarahbardvm@gmail.com.
Soodabeh Davaran *Student Research Committee, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran. davaran@tbzmed.ac.ir.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Certain polymeric materials such as polyurethanes (PUs) are the most prevalent class of used biomaterials in regenerative medicine and have been widely explored as vascular substitutes in several animal models. It is thought that PU-based biomaterials possess suitable hemo-compatibility with comparable performance related to the normal blood vessels. Despite these advantages, the possibility of thrombus formation and restenosis limits their application as artificial functional vessels. In this regard, various surface modification approaches have been developed to enhance both hemo-compatibility and prolong patency. While critically reviewing the recent advances in vascular tissue engineering, mainly PU grafts, this paper summarizes the application of preferred cell sources to vascular regeneration, physicochemical properties, and some possible degradation mechanisms of PU to provide a more extensive perspective for future research.

Indexed as

AngiogenesisEngineered vascular graftsPolyurethane-based scaffoldsTissue engineering modalities

Identifiers

PMID35331305
PMCPMC8951709

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.